list_vehicles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses what the tool returns (list with dimensions/payload) and how the output is used. For a simple list operation, this is sufficient; no side effects are mentioned but none are expected.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action and resource, zero waste. Every sentence adds value: first states purpose, second provides usage guidance.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete for a list tool. It explains what is returned and how to use the results. Could optionally mention if the list is exhaustive, but not necessary.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so baseline is 4 according to rubric. The description adds context about the list content (dimensions and payload), which is beneficial.

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 the verb 'List', specifies the resource 'all available trucks, trailers and shipping containers', and details the output attributes (interior dimensions and max payload). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly linking to pack_cargo.

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 explicitly instructs to use the returned codes as the 'vehicle' argument of pack_cargo, providing clear context on when to use this tool (before pack_cargo). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios, but the guidance is strong.

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