Tesla Battery Health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully states the output shape (monthly snapshots of ideal range) and the temporal nature of the data, which hints at a read-only historical tool. However, it does not confirm read-only semantics, permissions, or how far back the trend extends.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The second sentence partially restates the first ('range at 100% charge' vs 'ideal range when battery is at 100%'), a minor redundancy, but overall efficient.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value explanation is not required, and the single optional parameter is fully covered by the schema. For a simple read-only trend tool the description is mostly sufficient, though it omits any usage or scope guidance.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents car_id's filtering and default behavior. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific resource and metric: a battery degradation trend measured as range at 100% charge over time, with monthly snapshots. This is clearly distinct from charging or status siblings. It doesn't explicitly name or differentiate itself from any alternative, but no close sibling overlaps this specific health metric.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tesla_status or tesla_charging_history, and no mention of any prerequisites. The agent must infer usage context entirely from the resource name.

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