get_bus_stops

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. However, it offers no behavioral details beyond the basic action. It does not disclose what constitutes 'route information', whether results are ordered, or any side effects (e.g., network calls). The description is too sparse to enable informed invocation.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of 12 words with no redundancy. Every word contributes to purpose. No waste.

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?

Despite low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description fails to specify what 'route information' includes or what the output format looks like. Without output schema, the description should at least mention typical fields (e.g., stop names, coordinates). The minimal description leaves the agent guessing.

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 100% (one parameter fully documented as an enum). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides: 'for a specific bus line' is already implicit in the parameter name and enum. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('all stops and route information') and scope ('for a specific bus line'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_bus_routes' (which likely lists lines) and 'get_bus_vehicles' (which tracks vehicles).

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 implies usage context ('for a specific bus line') but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned, though the sibling set suggests 'get_bus_routes' as a prerequisite to obtain route codes.

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