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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only. The description adds behavioral context: fixed upfront pricing, no surge, accepted payment methods (cash/telebirr/Chapa), and a defined return payload. This goes beyond the schema without contradicting the readOnlyHint.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core purpose, then list return fields and workflow. There is no filler; every sentence adds decision-relevant information.

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 no output schema, the description names exactly what is returned (distance, ETA, fare per tier), making the call outcome predictable. It also gives the critical sequencing context with request_ride and the geographic scope.

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%, with both pickup and dropoff fully documented including examples. The description adds only scope ('inside Addis Ababa') already present in the schema, so it adds little beyond the baseline.

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?

States a specific action (quote a ride) and result: fixed upfront price, distance, ETA, and per-tier fares for a ride in Addis Ababa. The mention of 'before request_ride' also distinguishes it from the booking sibling.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Call this before request_ride and read the fare to the user,' which establishes the correct workflow. It does not spell out when not to use it or name alternative tools besides request_ride, so it stops short of a full 5.

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