ship_position

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

No annotations were provided, so the description must stand alone. It only states the function without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether the position is always available, what happens if no position is found, or if it requires specific permissions. The brevity leaves the agent uninformed about important behaviors.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. There is no unnecessary information, and it is front-loaded with the action.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose but lacks details about output format (e.g., coordinates, timestamp) or edge cases. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 describes the single parameter 'vessel_id' with the same phrasing ('GFW vessel ID or MMSI'). The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 'Get last known position for a vessel by GFW vessel ID' clearly states the action (get), the resource (last known position), and the input method (by GFW vessel ID). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like ship_track (which provides a series of positions) and ship_area (which might be area-based).

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 such as ship_track or ship_search. It does not mention any prerequisites or conditions for use.

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