brazil_freight_logistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that no authentication is required and that outputs include a diesel expense ratio and per-kg logistical cost impact, which is behavior beyond the annotations.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and regulation, then scope, then derived outputs. Little waste, though the regulatory citation is verbose.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming derived outputs (diesel fuel expense ratio, cost impact per kg). Combined with full schema coverage and annotations, this is largely complete, though exact return fields remain unspecified.

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% with two enums, so the schema already documents all five parameters including defaults. The description adds domain framing (axle classes, cargo types) but omits the 'perigosa' cargo enum value, so it adds only marginal value.

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 (calculates) and resource (official ANTT minimum road freight rates) with regulatory citation, and the scope (vehicle classes 2-9 axles, cargo types). Distinct from siblings like brazil_fuel_prices and brazil_compare_regions without needing their schemas.

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?

Implies usage context (freight rate computation correlated with diesel prices), but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings such as brazil_fuel_prices or brazil_cost_of_living. The agent must infer the scenario.

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