Classified (user-initiated only)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it matches only tire dimensions and intentionally omits bolt pattern/backspace filtering, which is useful beyond the 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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by clarifying details and a use-case example. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary repetition.

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 simple read-only search tool, a complete output schema, and full schema parameter coverage, the description is sufficient. It clearly explains the scope and the e-commerce use case, leaving no critical gaps.

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%, with each parameter carrying its own description. The description adds minimal new parameter semantics—it only reinforces that the three required tire dimensions are the focus. This is adequate but does not go 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Find vehicle generations that use a specific tire size.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it is the 'simplest classified search' and that it matches tire dimensions only, with no bolt pattern or backspace filtering.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: when you have a tire size and want to find compatible vehicles. It hints at alternatives by explicitly excluding bolt pattern and backspace filtering, which contrasts with rim-focused sibling tools, though it does not name specific alternatives.

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