query_charging_risk

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

No annotations provided. The description only states what is returned but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, data freshness, error conditions, or pagination. With no annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context but fails to do so.

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 single, concise sentence. It provides the core purpose without verbosity. However, it could include more value without being overly long.

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 output schema exists, return values are covered externally. But the description lacks information on how to use the optional city parameter and what constitutes 'charging failure' or 'state-of-charge metrics'. The context is incomplete for effective usage.

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%. The single optional parameter 'city' is not explained in the description. The agent has no indication of what the parameter does or how it affects results. The description completely fails to add meaning beyond the bare 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 'Return depot-day charging failure and state-of-charge metrics' clearly states the tool returns specific metrics (charging failure and SOC) at depot-day level. It distinguishes itself from siblings: query_mobility_metrics (likely general mobility) and retrieve_mobility_policy (policy retrieval).

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 on when to use this tool versus its siblings or any prerequisites. The description does not mention any context or exclusion criteria for using the tool.

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