drives_vehicle_reviewsList published renter reviews for a vehicle. Uses asset_id (not asset_rental_id) per the GraphQL schema.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skip | No | Number of reviews to skip for pagination | |
| limit | No | Maximum reviews to return (default server limit) | |
| asset_id | Yes | Vehicle asset ID from search or detail results | |
| published_only | No | Only return published reviews (default true) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds context by clarifying that it uses asset_id (not asset_rental_id), which is valuable behavioral information beyond the annotations.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.
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 adequately explains what the tool does and the key parameter, but does not mention the response format or pagination behavior. Given no output schema, a brief note on expected output would improve 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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description adds extra value by explicitly stating the use of asset_id over asset_rental_id, which is not conveyed in the schema description alone.
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 'List published renter reviews for a vehicle', using a specific verb and resource. The sibling tools (e.g., drives_vehicle_detail, drives_search_vehicles) serve different purposes, so this tool is well-distinguished.
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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to get reviews) and specifies the required asset_id parameter. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives, though no sibling tool overlaps.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of the rental process: searching by location, vehicles, airports, venues; getting details, availability, reviews, quotes; and host profiles. No two tools overlap in purpose, ensuring clear agent selection.
All tools share the 'drives_' prefix and use snake_case, but the word order varies: some follow verb_noun (drives_get_quote, drives_search_vehicles), others noun_verb (drives_airport_search, drives_location_suggest), and some are noun_noun (drives_vehicle_availability, drives_host_showroom). This inconsistency makes the pattern less predictable.
With 9 tools, the server covers essential rental marketplace operations without excess. Each tool serves a clear role, and the count is well-scoped for its domain.
The tool set comprehensively covers browsing, searching, quoting, and reviewing vehicles, plus location and venue queries. A minor gap is the absence of a tool to create or manage bookings, but the server likely focuses on pre-booking information.