get_lane_trend

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes server-side processing with accumulated history and freight-seasonality model. Details statistical method (Holt-Winters/ETS), output components including backtest metrics, and states 'Indicative market intelligence, not a carrier quote.' Clearly discloses premium nature and prerequisite call to get_spot_rate.

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 lengthy but front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence earns its place by adding value. Could be slightly trimmed, but given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema, the detail is justified.

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?

Despite 5 parameters and no output schema, the description thoroughly explains all outputs, methodology, limitations, and prerequisites. Covers what the tool returns, how it works, and how to use it effectively, making the agent fully informed.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds meaningful context: explains weeks cap on history, ship_date used for seasonality calendar, forecast_weeks with widening intervals. This aids understanding beyond schema definitions.

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 forecasts ocean spot rates for a lane and provides a grounded recommendation. It lists specific outputs: time series, statistical forecast, seasonality calendar, anomaly detection, and a concrete book-now/wait call. It distinguishes from siblings by noting port normalization same as get_spot_rate and suggesting calling get_spot_rate first.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Tip: call get_spot_rate (free) on a lane first — it seeds the history.' Also mentions premium payment and unlock instructions. Does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with siblings, but the context of sibling tools (many different purposes) makes this acceptable.

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