shipment_summary

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, so the safe read behavior is clear. The description adds value by detailing mode-specific calculations (e.g., road includes LDM and vehicle suggestion) and conditions for ADR and duty checks.

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 structured with a headline ('Composite endpoint') followed by mode-specific breakdowns. It is informative without being overly verbose, though it could be slightly tightened.

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 complexity (7 parameters, nested objects, multiple modes) and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains inputs and behavior. Enumerating mode-specific outputs compensates for missing output schema, though a structured return list would be beneficial.

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%, but the description summarizes parameter purpose beyond schema descriptions, such as how mode affects output and that items require dimensions/weight. It explains the role of optional fields like HS codes and UN numbers.

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 this as a composite endpoint that chains multiple calculations (CBM, weight, LDM, ADR, UK duty) into one response. It distinguishes from sibling tools by being the 'flagship composite tool' and enumerating mode-specific outputs.

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 explicitly states 'Use this tool when you need a complete shipment analysis in one call,' providing clear guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the sibling tool list allows inference that single calculators are for specific sub-tasks.

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