get_border_delays

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the data source (US Customs and Border Protection), update frequency (every 30 minutes), and coverage (all major commercial crossings). It implies a read-only operation. No contradictions.

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 at four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds useful context (data, frequency, coverage, use). No waste.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what data it returns, how often it updates, and its typical users. Complete for a no-input 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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds value by explaining the output structure (delay, lanes, status) and geographic coverage. Baseline for zero params is 4.

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 real-time commercial border crossing wait times at US-Mexico and US-Canada ports, with specific data points (delay in minutes, lanes open, port status). It names major crossings and is distinct from 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?

The description provides a clear use case (routing cross-border shipments by logistics companies) but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool guidance. The context is sufficient for most scenarios.

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