Bus seat map

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond them: exact layout symbol semantics (none, w, m, x, |, --, DR), the fact that price_toman is null for most buses, the location of seating rules, and the expiration of bus_id. This is unusually thorough output and precondition disclosure.

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-loads the purpose in the first clause, then uses compact legend-style formatting. Every sentence carries necessary interpretation detail for a complex seat-map output, with no wasted wording.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description supplies everything needed to interpret and use the result correctly: layout marks, rule pointer, price caveat, and bus_id expiration. Nothing material is missing.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already explains bus_id comes from a fresh mb_search_buses result. The description adds the important nuance that bus_id expires and must be taken from a fresh search, giving an operational reason to re-fetch beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Seat map of one bus") and enumerates exactly what the output contains: free seat numbers, seats sold to women and men, and a row-by-row layout. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like mb_search_buses.

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?

Provides clear operational context: bus_id comes from a fresh mb_search_buses result because it expires, and rule text is found in seat_rules. It does not name when-not-to-use cases or explicit alternative tools, but the context for correct invocation is well established.

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