get_driver_attempt_log

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds ordering by attempt number and indicates the full history, but it does not mention return format, whether failed attempts are included, or any pagination behavior.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core function and includes the key ordering detail. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly complete for a simple retrieval tool. However, it could benefit from a brief note on what the returned history contains, such as attempt statuses or timestamps.

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?

The schema has one required parameter, booking_id, and the description links it clearly by saying 'for a booking'. Even though schema coverage is 0%, the sole parameter is self-explanatory and the description reinforces its purpose.

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 the tool retrieves the full call attempt history for a booking, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('call attempt history'). It is distinct from sibling tools like timeout_driver_attempt, which imply individual attempt actions, by emphasizing 'full history'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool compared to alternatives such as timeout_driver_attempt or get_next_driver. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be invoked.

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