get_bus_station_racesRetrieve bus station races (trip schedules) for a chosen destination and date. Provide destination ID and date in dd.mm.yyyy to get available departures.
Get bus station races for a destination and date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | Trip date in dd.mm.yyyy format. | |
| destinationId | Yes | Destination id from search_bus_station_destinations. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a non-mutating lookup but doesn't describe response format, data scope, or any side effects/errors; this is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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?
One-sentence definition, front-loaded with the verb and resource; every word adds meaning and there is no redundant phrasing.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the result contains or at least clarify the domain term 'races'; it does neither, leaving important usage context missing.
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 baseline is 3; the description merely paraphrases the two parameters without adding new semantic details like accepted date ranges or destination context.
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?
Clearly states the operation (get) and resource (bus station races) with a scope qualifier (destination and date). However, it doesn't distinguish itself from closely related siblings like get_bus_station_calendar, and 'races' is domain-specific and undefined.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; the description only gives the basic context. An agent could confuse it with get_bus_station_calendar or search_bus_station_destinations without additional clues.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.