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

With only readOnlyHint=false as annotation, the description adds the key behavioral trait that the wreck remains for others to tow, indicating a non-destructive release. It also specifies the drop location (current POI), but does not mention prerequisites or failure conditions.

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?

A single declarative sentence with a clarifying parenthetical conveys the action and consequence without redundancy. Every element serves a purpose.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, location, and outcome. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to use 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?

The input schema already provides a full description for session_id (coverage 100%), so the description adds no parameter-specific semantics, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness.

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 uses a specific verb ('Release') and resource ('towed wreck') with a location qualifier ('at your current location'), clearly distinguishing it from wreck-disposal siblings like sell_wreck or scrap_wreck. The parenthetical reinforces that the wreck is dropped, not destroyed.

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 when to use the tool (when holding a towed wreck and wanting to drop it) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like scrap_wreck or jettison. It does clarify that the wreck remains for others, which indirectly differentiates it from destructive options, but lacks direct 'use this instead' guidance.

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