incoterms_lookup

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the domain (Incoterms define payment responsibilities, risk transfer) and listing the rules, which helps the agent understand what the tool provides beyond safe read 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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary, a clear explanatory paragraph, and bullet points for usage. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the purpose, the rules, and usage scenarios. A minor gap is not specifying the format of the output, but it's reasonably inferred.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by listing the actual code values and categorizing them by transport mode (e.g., '7 for any transport mode... 4 for sea/inland waterway only'), which enriches the parameter semantics.

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 'Look up Incoterms 2020 trade rules' and explains what Incoterms are and lists all 11 rules, making the purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools which cover different domains like HS codes, containers, etc.

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 provides explicit use cases in bullet points (e.g., 'Explain what an Incoterm means', 'Compare seller vs buyer responsibilities'), giving clear guidance on when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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