pup_list_car_numbers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the data scope ('issued to this account') and the usesCarNumbers condition, but it does not describe response format, pagination, or behavior when usesCarNumbers is false. Given the annotation coverage, this is acceptable but not rich.

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 with no redundant content. It front-loads the primary output ('The car numbers...') and includes the key conditional context without unnecessary detail.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter, read-only list tool with an annotated schema. The description explains what is returned and the condition under which it is relevant. No output schema exists, but the return concept is straightforward enough that the description is reasonably complete.

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 has 100% coverage: school_id is described as 'School id, from pup_list_students'. The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning, so the schema already carries the burden. Baseline 3 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 identifies the specific resource (car numbers issued to the account) and the use case (dismissal options where usesCarNumbers is true). It is clear enough to distinguish this from siblings like pup_list_students or pup_list_transportations, though it relies on the tool name for the verb 'list'.

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 clear context for when the tool applies: dismissal options where usesCarNumbers is true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the stated condition gives an agent enough context to decide when this tool is relevant.

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