Get target-soc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value with the M2M endpoint and the OAuth scope pdp-charging/targetSoc, which clarifies access requirements and the data source without contradicting the annotations.

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 a short, front-loaded summary that states the resource, key output fields, endpoint, and scope in two concise sentences. Every clause carries useful information with no filler.

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?

The description, combined with a fully documented parameter schema, an output schema, and read-only annotations, gives an agent everything needed to invoke a simple read-only retrieval tool correctly. The endpoint and scope add important operational context, and nothing critical is missing.

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 fully documents raw, vin, and delegated_account_id. The description does not add parameter-level details, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage, but it also does not enhance understanding of any parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the resource: target battery state of charge, including the setting type and last-update context, so an agent can tell what data the tool returns. It is not fully differentiated from siblings like get_battery or get_charging_estimate, but the word 'target' and the endpoint make its purpose distinct enough.

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 implies usage when target state of charge or its setting type is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over related siblings such as get_battery or get_charging_estimate. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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