list_cfl_parking

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It accurately indicates a read-only list operation with no destructive side effects. Although it doesn't specify authorization needs or rate limits, the simplicity of listing facilities makes the description sufficient.

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, concise sentence that contains no filler. Every word contributes to the purpose, making it highly efficient.

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?

The description tells what the tool does but omits details about the return format (e.g., fields like name, address) and whether results are paginated. Given the lack of an output schema, the agent lacks information about the response structure, which is a notable gap for a list operation.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Per guidelines, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter info because none exist, which is appropriate.

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 lists official CFL Park and Ride facilities. The verb 'List' and specific resource make the purpose unambiguous. The sibling 'get_cfl_parking' suggests a different operation (get details of one facility), so the name and description effectively distinguish it.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_cfl_parking' or other parking tools. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent to infer usage from names alone.

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