Tesla Live

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does disclose meaningful traits: the data source (TeslaMate positions table), the polling cadence caveat ('polled periodically, not real-time'), and explicitly omitted fields (sentry mode, lock status, media). Auth requirements and rate limits are still unaddressed.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the freshness/omission caveats grouped after. No filler text.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description supplies the essential context an agent needs – source, staleness, and what is missing – though it leaves the relationship to the similarly-named tesla_status sibling unstated.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single car_id parameter is already fully documented, including its default resolution order. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource – the latest polled vehicle state – and enumerates the domains covered (battery, climate, location). It is distinguishable from the history siblings (tesla_state_history, tesla_location_history) by the word 'latest', but it does not explicitly name tesla_status, which likely overlaps.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'latest polled' suggests current-snapshot use vs the history tools, and the 'not real-time' note implies when this data is unsuitable. However, no sibling is named as an alternative and no explicit when/when-not guidance is given.

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