vector_drive_on_charger

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the immediate return condition, the prerequisite for the charger in the world model, and the motor-stop fallback behavior on timeout. This goes far beyond a generic 'drive' statement and gives the agent a realistic model of side effects.

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 concise, well-ordered sentences cover the core action, immediate-return behavior, prerequisite, and fallback. No filler or redundant restating of the tool name; every sentence contributes information.

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 explains the early-return value and the timeout fallback, which are the main non-obvious behaviors. It does not specify the exact return value for the normal successful drive, but an agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly and understand its failure mode.

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 already documents timeout_sec with type, default, and bounds. The description adds behavioral meaning by explaining that the timeout triggers a best-effort motor-stop fallback, which is not present in the schema. This enriches the parameter's purpose.

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 states a specific action: drive Vector back onto its charger, with a configurable timeout. This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like vector_drive_off_charger and generic vector_drive by focusing on docking behavior.

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?

Provides an explicit precondition: the charger must be in Vector's recent world model, and directs the agent to use vector_scan first if not. It also describes the immediate early-return case. It does not enumerate alternative docking methods, but the guidance is clear enough for selection.

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