wb_tariffs_box

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention what data is returned, whether this is a read-only lookup, whether tariffs are current or historical, or any side effects. 'Tariff growth eats margin' is business motivation, not behavioral transparency.

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 very short and the key phrase is front-loaded. However, the clause 'tariff growth eats margin' does not help an agent select or invoke the tool and is filler, so not every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. An agent cannot infer the returned shape, the unit of tariffs, or how this tool behaves operationally compared with sibling tariff tools. The P0 label is not functional context.

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 input schema fully documents the single optional date parameter with format and default, so the description does not need to repeat it. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but with 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool's domain: box logistics tariffs for FBO, which distinguishes it from sibling tariff tools such as wb_tariffs_pallet and wb_tariffs_return. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', relying on a noun phrase, so it does not fully state the action the tool performs.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no explicit exclusions. The name and parenthetical imply FBO box logistics, but the description does not tell the agent when to select this instead of the related tariff tools.

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