Contact Driver

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that this tool is harmless, masks the driver phone, and never calls or messages anyone, which is important context for an action named 'contact_driver.' It does not cover failure behavior or return format, but the major side-effect concern is addressed.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler: the first states the action and the phone-masking, the second states the safety property. Key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a one-parameter demo tool, the description covers purpose and safety but omits the return shape and the role of rideId. With no output schema, a bit more detail about the returned 'contact action' object would make it fully complete.

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 never mentions rideId. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not explain that rideId identifies the ride whose driver contact should be returned, which would be needed to fully compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('demo contact action') and clarifies the phone is masked. It distinguishes itself from real contact or emergency help by saying 'never calls or messages anyone,' though it doesn't explicitly name sibling 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?

It gives no guidance on when to call this instead of, say, emergency_help, get_driver_profile, or a real messaging tool. The word 'demo' implies a test/sandbox context, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are provided.

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