kia_charge_targets

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description discloses that the tool reads the 'evc/gts' endpoint, returns one entry per plug type, and is verified live. It reinforces the read-only nature, providing full transparency for safe usage.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and adds essential details (endpoint reference, per-plug-type output, verification, read-only nature) efficiently.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure (entries for AC and DC) and confirms live verification. It covers everything an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 covers the single parameter (vinKey) fully, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter, but also does not contradict or degrade the schema information.

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 reads EV charge targets, specifying the verb 'Read' and the resource 'EV charge targets'. It further explains scope: per plug type (AC and DC), distinguishing it from sibling write tools like kia_set_charge_limits.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating it is read-only, which contrasts with sibling tools that modify. However, it lacks explicit direction like 'use when you need to view charge targets, not to modify them'. The read-only hint and context from siblings make the purpose clear, but explicit alternatives would improve it.

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