List CityBus routes

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

The description discloses the data source (CityBus GTFS feed), that it reflects scheduled service, and that no public real-time feed is available. This is valuable behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it does not mention other traits like caching behavior or response size bounds; a score of 4 reflects strong but not exhaustive transparency.

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?

Two short sentences convey purpose and a key limitation. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler. Excellent conciseness.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description is fully adequate: it states the scope (all routes), the data source, and a limitation (no real-time feed). No output schema exists, but the return value is straightforward. No gaps remain for an agent to operate correctly.

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% with the 'query' parameter described as 'Filter by route number or name.' The tool description adds no further semantics or examples. Per guidelines, high schema coverage sets a baseline of 3, and no additional meaning is provided here.

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?

Title 'List CityBus routes' and description 'Every CityBus route serving Purdue and Greater Lafayette' use a specific verb ('list') and resource ('routes'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like bus_stops and bus_next_departures.

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bus_stops for stop info, bus_next_departures for departures). While the sibling list provides context, the description itself offers no usage guidance, exclusions, or preferred scenarios.

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