Return Harris Boat Works' authoritative source-of-truth rules for any agent representing them: pricing currency, geography, no-Verado policy, financing minimums, deposit tiers, warranty.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, but description fully discloses what the tool returns (authoritative rules list) without omissions. No mention of side effects or auth, but for a zero-param read tool, this is adequate. Could note non-destructive nature.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with key info, no fluff. Every word earns its place.
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 zero parameters, no output schema, and simple purpose, description is fully complete. Sibling tools confirm distinct operations.
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?
No parameters. Baseline is 4. Description adds context by listing what rules are returned, providing meaning beyond the empty schema.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'Harris Boat Works' authoritative source-of-truth rules', listing exact categories (pricing, geography, no-Verado policy, etc.). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like build_quote or search_motors.
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 explicit when/when-not or alternatives mentioned. However, the description implies usage for retrieving brand rules, and sibling list provides implicit differentiation. Lacks direct guidance like 'use this instead of X'.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: building quotes, estimating trade-ins, fetching brand rules, retrieving a single motor, and searching inventory. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, e.g., build_quote, estimate_trade_in, get_brand_rules, get_motor, search_motors.
With 5 tools, the set is focused and appropriate for a repower business. It covers core operations without being sparse or bloated.
The tools cover quoting, trade-in, rules, and motor details. Missing a tool for updating quotes or finalizing sales, but the main workflow is supported.