estimate_berth_co2

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses meaningful scope constraints (auxiliary engine only, boilers excluded, liquid-bulk tankers only), which an agent needs. However, it says nothing about the nature of the operation (deterministic read-only computation) or the units/format of the returned CO2 figure.

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 purpose sentence is dense but front-loaded and the argument list is compact and scannable. There is no filler; a slightly long opening clause is the only cost.

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?

Purpose, scope, and all parameters are covered for a 4-param tool with no annotations and no output schema. The main gap is that nothing indicates the form or units of the returned estimate, and no sibling routing is offered for the single-call versus multi-call distinction.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: all four parameters are documented with meaning (dwt=deadweight tonnage, berth_hours=berthing to unberthing, fuel=burnt by auxiliary engine, sfoc default 215 g/kWh). It does not restate the fuel enum values or the CO2 output units, but the per-parameter coverage is strong.

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 (estimate), resource (at-berth CO2), and narrows scope to ONE liquid-bulk (tanker) call, the auxiliary engine, and explicitly excludes boilers. The 'ONE ... call' phrasing implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling estimate_calls_co2 without needing to open either schema.

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?

Scope limits (single call, liquid-bulk tanker, auxiliary engine only, boilers excluded) imply when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus estimate_calls_co2 or the other siblings, and no stated prerequisites. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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