query_data

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states returns CSV format but omits details on rate limits, authentication, error handling, or whether it is read-only. The prerequisite step is helpful, but more behavioral context would improve 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 sentences, no unnecessary words. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides essential prerequisite. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given the dynamic params object and no output schema, the description adequately tells the agent the return format (CSV) and the cross-reference to get_route_detail for parameter details. It could mention error conditions, but the core usage is covered.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, but the description adds value by directing users to get_route_detail for understanding the dynamic 'params' object, which goes beyond the schema's generic 'key-value pass-through' explanation.

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 clearly states the tool queries data of a specified route by parameters and returns CSV format. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_routes (listing) and get_route_detail (detail) by focusing on data retrieval with dynamic parameters.

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 explicitly instructs users to first call get_route_detail to learn input/return field descriptions before organizing params. This provides a clear workflow, though it could mention when not to use (e.g., if only need route metadata).

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