list-hf-tire-rim-diameters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is known to be safe. The description adds that results are in inches and that it helps discover validation values, but it does not disclose potential pagination, ordering, or other runtime behavior. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 with no fluff: the first declares the action and filters, the second gives the primary use case. Front-loaded and 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?

For a filtered list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers its purpose, filters, and the reason to call it. It doesn't explain the return format, but for a discovery tool returning rim diameters, this is not a significant gap.

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 schema describes all parameters with detailed explanations, units, and cross-references (e.g., region codes from list-regions, section width units). The description adds no new parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is warranted.

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 explicitly states the tool lists all rim diameters available for HF tyres, with optional filters. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list-rim-diameters and list-tire-rim-diameters by specifying 'HF tyres' and also names a downstream use case (search-by-hf-tire).

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool to discover valid rim_diameter values for search-by-hf-tire, providing a clear context. It does not enumerate alternatives or when not to use, but the HF-type specificity and optional filters imply its scope.

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