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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral details such as missing-ID behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits. It simply restates the 'by id' retrieval pattern, which is already evident from the schema.

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 a single, short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the essential purpose in four words, making it appropriately concise for a simple getter 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?

Given the low complexity (one required parameter, no nested objects), rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It lacks explicit notes about not-found behavior, but for an idempotent read with an output schema, this is acceptable. The description covers the core semantics needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the id parameter. 'Single vehicle by id' confirms id is the lookup key, but does not detail format, constraints, or semantics beyond the schema's type 'string' and example UUID. The description adds minimal value over the 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?

The description 'Single vehicle by id' clearly identifies the tool's function as retrieving one vehicle based on an ID, which distinguishes it from the sibling 'vehicles' tool that presumably lists multiple. While no explicit verb like 'get' is used, the intent is unmistakable and the resource is specified.

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 when a single vehicle ID is known, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over the plural 'vehicles' tool or other sibling list tools. No alternatives or exclusionary conditions are mentioned, making the guidance solely implicit.

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