get_idles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Returns'), but it does not add context about response format, pagination, default time ranges, or any side effects. The definition of idle periods is helpful, but deeper behavioral traits are absent.

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 that is front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and the parenthetical definition adds value without extra verbosity. Every element earns its place.

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 simple list-retrieval tool with no required parameters and a clear schema, the description covers the essential semantics of what constitutes an idle period. It does not detail the return shape, but given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool, the description is reasonably complete.

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?

All 6 parameters have full descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), lowering the burden on the tool description. The description adds a helpful definition of 'idle periods' that clarifies the meaning of the returned data, but it does not provide parameter-level context beyond what the schema already states.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('idle periods') with a clear parenthetical definition ('vehicle parked, not driving or charging'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_drives 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?

The description implies when to use the tool (to retrieve idle periods, complementing drives and charges), but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. For example, it does not mention that get_drives or get_charges should be used for driving or charging data.

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