IvedaAI: DwellHistory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the description only needs to add extra context. It provides response JSON details (status, truncated/timedOut) and marks start/end as required, which adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, though it omits details like pagination defaults or auth requirements.

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 front-loaded with the API name and response notes, then structured as an operation line with a concise parameter list. While it is dense, every element serves a purpose and there is no fluff, making it appropriately sized for the complex query parameter set.

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?

For a read-only list operation with many optional filters and an output schema absent, the description covers the operation, required start/end range, and response flags, making it fairly complete. Minor gaps like default page size or explicit return format are acceptable given the parameter list and provided response notes.

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 description supplies complete parameter semantics by listing all query parameters with types, required markers (start*, end*), and the type enum (bicycle|bus|car|motorcycle|person|truck|vehicle). The input schema's query property is generic, so the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly.

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's function with the operation 'GET /api/dwellHistories — Find dwell histories', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling IvedaAI tools by focusing on dwell histories, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative IvedaAI tools. It lacks explicit exclusions or references to sibling tools, so the agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and operation line.

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