get_insurance_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool calculates risk score and premium but does not clarify if it is read-only, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. The lack of side-effect disclosure is a gap.

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 well-structured with a brief English title, a clear statement of purpose, a recommendation, and a parameter list. It is concise with no unnecessary words, though the title line could be considered redundant given the tool name.

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 fails to explain the return value or output structure despite the tool being primarily used to inform about costs. Without an output schema, the agent has no idea what the quote contains. Additionally, it does not address error handling or validation, making the definition incomplete for effective use.

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 0%, but the description adds meaningful one-line explanations for each parameter and enumerates allowed values for task_type. While helpful, it could provide more detail (e.g., what the IDs represent, amount constraints) to fully compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: creating an insurance quote before an agent transaction, calculating risk score and premium. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by recommending usage before create_escrow requests, which is a distinct action from other tools like get_insurance_info or open_dispute.

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 recommends using this tool before every create_escrow request, providing clear context for its use. However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like get_insurance_info, so it lacks full exclusion guidance.

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