explain_method

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose what the response contains (method, parameters, sources) for a read-style explainer. However, it omits any statement of side effects, permissions, or rate limits, and does not clarify whether it is a pure lookup.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though arguably too terse given the parameter documentation gap.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and a single enum parameter keeps the surface small. Still, the description does not connect the enum topics to the sibling estimation tools, which is the key context an agent needs to call this 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 coverage is 0%, so the description should explain the 'topic' parameter, but it only says 'a tool's numbers' generically. It never maps the three enum values (berth_co2, port_statistics, port_times) to the methods or sibling tools they correspond to, leaving the agent to guess.

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 ('Explain') and a specific resource ('the method, parameters and sources behind a tool's numbers'), which tells the agent this is a meta/documentation tool rather than an estimator. It does not explicitly name how it differs from siblings like estimate_berth_co2, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite, and no mention of the sibling tools whose numbers it explains. The agent must infer from the enum values that this is the companion to the estimation tools.

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