find_locomotive

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

Discloses matching tolerance (case-insensitive, accent-insensitive), partial match behavior, and error handling with candidate listing. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden and delivers.

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?

Concise yet thorough; front-loaded purpose; each sentence adds value. Structure uses paragraphs effectively without redundancy.

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?

Given no annotations or output schema, description covers all needed: purpose, usage, matching rules, error handling, and agent action. No gaps.

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?

Single 'name' parameter fully explained with examples and matching rules. Despite 0% schema coverage, description compensates completely, adding meaning beyond schema.

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 resolves a locomotive name to a DCC address, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explaining it is a precursor to other operations like acquire_throttle.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (user names a locomotive instead of DCC address) and provides guidance on handling ambiguous or unmatched names by asking user to clarify. No alternative tools mentioned, but context clear.

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