Classified (user-initiated only)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds valuable context about the output shape (tire sizes with generation counts) and the behavior of diameter_range, which goes beyond the raw annotations.

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 three short, focused sentences with the main action front-loaded. No fluff, and every sentence adds value: what it does, what it returns, and a usage example.

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?

Given the tool's 16 parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and output. It explains the key optional behavior (diameter_range) and the primary use case. It lacks explicit mention of required parameters, but those are clearly indicated in the schema, so this is not a major gap.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description only highlights diameter_range, but the schema already explains it ('Widen rim diameter search ±N inches'). This meets the baseline but does not add deeper meaning beyond the schema.

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 starts with 'Find compatible tire sizes for a given rim specification,' which uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like ws_find_vehicles_for_rim. The return value (tire sizes with generation counts) is also stated.

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 mentions 'Useful for tire product recommendations on wheel product pages,' providing a clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or cases where other tools (e.g., ws_find_vehicles_for_rim) would be more appropriate.

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