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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is unsigned and records a theft, but it does not explain permissions, whether a recovery case can be opened only once, what happens to the vehicle, or what the prepared result should be used for beyond posting a bounty.

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-loads the action and condition, and avoids unnecessary repetition. The parenthetical annotations are compact and help connect the tool to the underlying action and follow-up tool.

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 two-parameter prepare tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose and next step but leaves gaps around the return value and execution flow. It says the operation is unsigned, which helps, but does not explain what the agent should do with the prepared transaction or what prerequisites must already be true.

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 both required parameters clearly. The description adds situational meaning for vehicleId by saying the vehicle must be stolen and parked, but does not add further detail about wallet handling beyond what the schema already says.

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 states a specific verb and resource: preparing an unsigned recovery case after a parked vehicle is stolen. It also distinguishes the action from the next step by naming prepare_garage_post_bounty, so an agent can tell this is the case-opening step, not the bounty-posting step.

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?

It gives a clear triggering condition: use this after one of your PARKED vehicles was stolen. It also points to the follow-up tool, prepare_garage_post_bounty, but does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives such as when not to open a recovery case.

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