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

The description transparently notes that the result is an indicative total, not the exact booking price, and explains rules such as minimums and distance surcharges. This sets clear expectations about the tool's outputs and constraints.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core pricing rules and followed by the output nature. No unnecessary words or redundant details.

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?

Given the moderate complexity (six parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context to understand the tool's purpose and key constraints. It does not detail every parameter but covers the essential context for a pricing 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?

Schema descriptions cover 67% of parameters, but the tool description adds only modest clarification. It reinforces the meaning of hours and destination but leaves language and passengers unexplained. Some compensation is provided, but not enough to fully clarify all 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 clearly states what the tool does: it provides pricing for a chauffeur-driven Mercedes, covering hourly and full-day rates, with specific rules for London and outside London. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like transfer or meet-and-greet pricing.

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 implies usage for hourly chauffeur services and mentions conditions like minimum hours and distance fees, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools. It lacks direct guidance on when to choose this tool over get_transfer_price or get_meet_greet_price.

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