maritime_get_voyage_full

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

Without annotations, the description discloses behavioral traits: returns enriched data with confidence scores, optional crew inclusion, and output format choices. It does not mention mutability or safety, but read-only nature is implied by 'get'. Sufficient transparency for tool selection.

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 Args, Returns, and Tips sections. It is informative but could be slightly more concise; for example, the Tips section repeats some info. Still efficient and front-loaded.

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 the complexity of a unified view with multiple linked records, the description covers key aspects: what is returned, how confidence works, and optional crew. Missing exact output structure but sufficient for an agent to understand capabilities.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains each parameter: voyage_id with examples, include_crew with effect, output_mode with options. It adds context beyond schema (e.g., confidence interpretation, link fields). This compensates for missing schema 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 retrieves a unified voyage view with all linked records, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_voyage, get_wreck, etc. It specifies what is included (wreck, vessel, hull profile, CLIWOC track, crew) and provides a specific action verb 'get unified view'.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: start with maritime_search_voyages, and notes this tool replaces separate calls. It provides tips on include_crew and confidence scores, and mentions cross-referencing. This is comprehensive guidance.

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