probe_wheels

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full responsibility. It mentions 'scans a range of offsets' suggesting a non-destructive read operation, but does not explicitly state if it modifies memory, requires permissions, or has side effects. Lacks clarity on behavioral traits beyond the scanning action.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: first states purpose, second explains why needed, third describes the method. No wasted words, front-loaded with the primary 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 no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose, but lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., being in a vehicle, memory access) or expected behavior after execution. Adequate but leaves gaps for an AI agent to infer.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema provides complete information. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but with no parameters, there is nothing to add. Baseline for high coverage is 3, and the absence of parameters makes this trivial, warranting a 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 probes vehicle memory to find the wheel array offset, explaining the reason (different game versions use different offsets). It uses specific verb 'probe' and resource 'vehicle memory', and distinguishes from sibling 'find_wheel_visual_offsets' which targets visual offsets.

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 implies use when wheel array offset is unknown due to game version, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like 'find_wheel_visual_offsets' or prerequisites. No when-not or alternative tools mentioned.

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