Unlock vehicle

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the car stays unsecured until locked, human confirmation is required, and the 'confirmed' vs 'unconfirmed' response semantics are spelled out so the agent does not overstate success.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its physical effect, then the safety requirement, then the response caveat — each sentence carries unique operational value with no filler.

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 single-parameter destructive action with no output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: the physical consequence, the confirmation gate, and how to interpret the returned confirmation field.

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?

Only one parameter, and its schema description ('The vehicle id from list_vehicles') already covers it at 100% coverage. The description adds nothing about the parameter, 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 ('Unlock the vehicle') and immediately explains the physical consequence, which distinguishes it from the sibling lock_vehicle and from read-only tools like get_vehicle_location.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition ('MUST obtain explicit human confirmation before invoking') and instructs surfacing a reason to the user, which is strong when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming lock_vehicle as the counterpart action.

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