Get freight rates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating 'Does not spend money' and listing the return fields (rate_id, carrier, service, etc.), reinforcing safe behavior and providing output context.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no extraneous words. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently covers return fields and side effects.

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 10 parameters and nested objects, the description provides a complete overview of the tool's behavior and output without missing critical details. It could mention pagination or limits, but overall it's sufficient.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters fully. The description does not add additional meaning to parameters beyond what is in the schema, achieving baseline.

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 'Quote LTL/FTL freight rates from all allowed carriers,' specifying the verb (quote), resource (freight rates), and scope (LTL/FTL, all carriers). It distinguishes itself from siblings like deftship_get_parcel_rates and deftship_get_pickup_rates.

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 notes 'Does not spend money,' indicating safe usage. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to compare rates before creating an order.

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