get_drives

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

The description implies a read-only operation but does not disclose behaviors such as result ordering, pagination, default timezone handling, or VIN fallback to environment variables. With no annotations, these gaps leave the agent without important context for invocation.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and immediately conveying the core function. It is appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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?

Despite the schema detailing each parameter, the description lacks high-level context about filtering by date range or tags, result limits, and output structure. With 10 parameters and no output schema, a more comprehensive overview is necessary for correct tool selection and usage.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but its mention of output fields (distance, energy, speed, route) provides some context beyond the schema, though it doesn't compensate for missing parameter insight.

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 returns a list of drives with specific details (distance, energy, speed, route), using the verb 'Returns' and naming the resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_drive_path (which retrieves a single drive's path) and get_charges.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are prerequisites or filters mentioned. The description only states what it does, not the context in which it should be selected.

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