Classified (user-initiated only)

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent hints, the description discloses the prerequisite dependency on a prior search and outlines the return data (per-vehicle rows with OEM wheel specs and fitment deltas). This adds valuable behavioral context without contradicting 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 concise, with a front-loaded main sentence and a bulleted list of prerequisites. Every sentence earns its place, and the section on what it returns is clear and without fluff.

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 high parameter count and complexity, the description covers the essential workflow: prerequisites, parent search references, and return data. It does not explain every parameter or pagination, but the 100% schema coverage and output schema fill the gaps. Slight room for more detail on how 'trims' differ from 'modifications' but not critical.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds value by instructing the caller to reuse the same rim parameters and tolerances as the parent search, which is not stated in the schema. This ties the many parameters together logically.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Drill down into individual trims for a generation from ws_find_vehicles_for_rim.' It identifies the specific verb ('drill down'), the resource ('individual trims for a generation'), and distinguishes itself from the parent search tool by referencing it directly.

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 explicit prerequisites: call ws_find_vehicles_for_rim first to obtain make, model, and generation slugs, and use the same rim parameters and tolerances as the parent search. This gives clear context on when to use the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or exclusions.

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