get_travel_advice

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: returns multiple route options, includes status and crowding information, supports real-time updates, and handles both departure and arrival time optimization. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or pagination behavior for the returned routes.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: the first establishes core functionality, the second adds important contextual details about timing and output. Every phrase adds value with zero redundant information, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by explaining what the tool returns (multiple route options with status/crowding info) and key behavioral aspects. However, it doesn't fully compensate for the lack of output schema by detailing the structure of returned data or error handling, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents all 4 parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'immediate departure or specific future time' and 'optimize for arrival time,' which helps contextualize the dateTime and searchForArrival parameters, but doesn't provide syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb ('Get detailed travel routes') and resource ('between two train stations'), specifying the scope includes transfers, real-time updates, platform info, and journey duration. It distinguishes from siblings like get_arrivals/get_departures (which focus on single stations) and get_disruptions (which doesn't provide 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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool ('plan trips for immediate departure or for a specific future time') and mentions optimization options. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools, though the differentiation is implied through the detailed functionality described.

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