mark_vehicle_out_of_service

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It reveals the noteworthy side effect of returning orphaned deliveries and clarifies that these were previously assigned, but it does not disclose whether the operation is reversible, what exactly becomes inactive, or what happens to the deliveries after return.

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 one efficient sentence with the primary action front-loaded and a useful parenthetical clarification. Every word contributes meaning.

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 and no output schema, the description omits essential selection context, parameter explanation, and side-effect detail. It is better than a tautology but still incomplete for a mutation tool with two parameters.

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 0% and the description adds no meaning for either parameter. 'vehicle_id' is implied by 'vehicle', but 'reason' is completely unexplained.

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 names a specific action and resource ('Mark a vehicle inactive') and adds a distinguishing side effect ('return its orphaned (previously assigned) deliveries'), which clearly separates this operation from sibling list/plan/update tools.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as reassign_deliveries or update_delivery_status. The intended context is only implied by the action name, not stated.

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