tibia_find_travel

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: rows represent single legs, each row includes the start/origin and the NPC's recorded city, location, and position, and fares are included. This helps the agent interpret results correctly.

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 three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the key row-level detail and the important limitation. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the essential semantics for a read-only lookup tool, and the output schema handles return-value details. It clearly states the single-leg limitation and row composition. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning pagination or the inactive-route filter, but these are secondary given the schema defaults and output schema.

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 50%, with limit, cursor, and include_inactive left undocumented in the schema. The description does not compensate for these gaps; it only restates the general to/from concept already covered by the schema. It adds no meaning for the pagination, limit, or inactive-route parameters.

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 ('Find') and resource ('boat, carpet and other travel routes') and clearly distinguishes this tool from the sibling find_* tools by focusing on travel. It also clarifies the output granularity ('Each row is one leg') and what the tool does not do ('does not plan journeys'), leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool: to look up individual travel legs with fares. It explicitly states a when-not ('does not plan journeys'), which prevents misuse for multi-leg trip planning, though it does not name a specific alternative tool for journey planning.

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