Tabellone Partenze

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add value by declaring the data is 'in tempo reale' and listing the fields returned (delay, actual vs scheduled platform, circulation status). It says nothing about auth needs, rate limits, or how 'data_ora' alters behavior, leaving gaps for a real-time query tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core action, followed by a compact field list. Every element earns its place, though listing return fields overlaps somewhat with the existing output schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be spelled out, yet the description partially duplicates them. The main incompleteness is the undocumented 'data_ora' parameter and the absence of any pointer to the station-code lookup workflow, leaving an agent unsure how to discover valid codes.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides example values for the required 'codice_stazione' ('S01700', 'S08409'), which is genuinely helpful, but the optional 'data_ora' parameter is never mentioned — its format and effect (historical vs current board) are completely undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb+resource ('Restituisce il tabellone delle partenze') and enumerates the returned fields, making the tool's output clear. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'tabellone_arrivi', relying on the reader to infer the departures-vs-arrivals distinction.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g. tabellone_arrivi) nor on how to obtain the station code (siblings like cerca_stazione/autocompleta_stazione exist but are not referenced). The example station codes hint at input format but not workflow.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.