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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing that the quote is firm and expires in 15 minutes. This tells the agent that the result is time-sensitive and binding, which is valuable for decision-making.

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 one sentence of 12 words, front-loading the core action and key constraints. Every word is necessary, with no repetition or filler.

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?

The description covers the essential purpose and key behaviors (firm, expiry). For a simple quotation tool with no output schema, it provides sufficient context for the agent to understand what the tool does and what to expect. It could mention the return format, but the core is clear.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add extra detail beyond the summary phrase '1-3 pallets'. While this aligns with the pallets constraint, it adds no new parameter-specific meaning, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 clearly states 'Quote a cargo van shipment' with specific constraints (1-3 pallets, firm price, 15-min expiry). It immediately distinguishes from sibling tools like ltl_quote or ftl_quote by specifying the vehicle type and shipment size.

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 the tool is for cargo van shipments of 1-3 pallets, but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or provide exclusions. Without explicit guidance, an agent must infer usage from the scope.

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