Get Car Data

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full load. It usefully discloses the ~3.7 Hz sampling rate and the resulting response-size hazard, which is real value beyond structured fields, but says nothing about pagination, hard limits, or required permissions.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, front-loading purpose first and the filtering imperative second. Every clause 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers purpose, sampling behavior, and filtering strategy for a 14-parameter tool. The main gap is that it doesn't clarify which dimensions (session_key/driver_number) anchor the query.

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 only 14%, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It enumerates the telemetry channels that map to the min/max filter pairs and gives example usage for date_from/date_to and speed_min, but leaves the other ten parameters' semantics (min vs max, date format, session_key values) unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb (fetch) and resource (car telemetry) and enumerates the actual channels (speed, rpm, gear, throttle, brake, DRS). This clearly separates it from siblings like get_laps or get_positions, so an agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives actionable guidance to always narrow using range filters and provides concrete examples (single lap via date_from/date_to, high-speed samples via speed_min). It lacks explicit when-to-use-vs-sibling routing (e.g., get_location for position over time), so it stops just short of a 5.

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