vehicle_lookup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying the return content (dimensions, payload, pallet capacity, features) and the behavior when slug is omitted (lists all vehicles). No contradictions with annotations.

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 efficient: one introductory sentence, a list of vehicle types, then a bulleted list of use cases. No redundant or vague statements; every sentence serves a purpose. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 is a simple lookup with no output schema, the description covers what it does, what parameters do, and what it returns (specs, dimensions, payload, pallet). It could be slightly more detailed about the exact fields in the response, but it is sufficient for an agent to select and use the tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for its 3 parameters. The description reinforces slug usage ('omit to list all') and lists categories/regions in use case bullets, but schema already provides clear definitions. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Look up road freight vehicle and trailer specifications.' It lists 17 specific types, making the tool's purpose clear and distinguishable from sibling lookup tools like airline_lookup or container_lookup.

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 lists four use cases (find vehicle specs, compare EU vs US dimensions, determine pallet capacity, check payload limits). It provides clear context for when to use, though it does not include negative examples or alternative tools.

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