get_route_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool returns 'detailed route information' but does not state key behavioral traits such as read-only nature, potential latency from external API calls, authentication requirements, or any constraints. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise with clear Args and Returns sections, no redundant sentences. Every part contributes to understanding. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 lacking annotations, the description covers the main purpose, parameters, and return content fairly well. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return structure. Some gaps remain (e.g., slug constraints), but overall it is adequate for a simple two-parameter tool.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description adds meaning by specifying that from_city and to_city are origin and destination city slugs with examples (e.g., 'rome', 'milan'). However, it does not clarify slug format, case sensitivity, or provide an exhaustive list, so the added value is moderate.

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 retrieves detailed route information between two Italian cities, including transport modes, price ranges, and travel times. This verb+resource combination is distinct from siblings like get_cheapest_travel_day (which focuses on cheapest day) and list_italy_routes (which likely lists routes).

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings. The description does not mention alternative tools or conditions for exclusion, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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