start_steering_wheel_heater

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal that the tool mutates state ('Turns on') and includes a notable side-effect ('auto-wakes if asleep'). However, it omits other relevant behaviors such as whether the command is idempotent, how retries or wait_for_completion affect execution, or any error conditions.

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, front-loaded sentence that delivers both the primary purpose and a key behavioral condition. There is no fluff or repetition; every word 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 state-changing command with a fully described parameter schema, the description covers the essential purpose and an important behavioral nuance (auto-wake). It does not explain return values, but no output schema is present and the action is straightforward, so the description is largely 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?

The input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3 even though the tool description does not mention them. The description adds no extra meaning about vin, max_attempts, or wait_for_completion that would elevate the score.

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 ('Turns on') and names the exact resource ('steering wheel heater'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool stop_steering_wheel_heater and other climate/seat controls. The added 'auto-wakes if asleep' provides useful scope beyond a generic label.

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 it (when the steering wheel heater should be turned on) but gives no explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations. The 'auto-wakes if asleep' note offers context about the car's state, but it does not say when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives like set_seat_heat or start_climate.

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