Get parcel rates

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

The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) by stating 'Does not spend money.' It adds context about the return fields and the optional carrier speeding up the response, going beyond the annotation hints.

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 two sentences plus a brief list of return fields, all front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure makes the tool's purpose and key details immediately accessible.

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 10 parameters and a nested schema, the description covers the essential return fields (id, carrier, service, final_price, eta, has_enough_credits) and the key parameter advice. It doesn't address error handling or pagination, but for a rate quote tool this is adequate.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the carrier parameter's effect ('Faster than quoting all') and hinting at defaults for length_unit and weight_unit via 'Defaults to your account preference,' though the latter is mentioned in the 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 specifies the tool's verb ('Quote'), resource ('parcel shipping rates'), and scope ('from all allowed carriers for a given from/to address and package list'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like deftship_get_freight_rates and deftship_get_insurance_rates by focusing on parcels.

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 explains when to use the tool (to quote rates) and provides a performance tip for the optional carrier parameter. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context and sibling tool names imply the alternatives, and the non-destructive hint is clear.

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