freight_logistics_guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds 'DEMO', signaling that the tool is illustrative or non-production, which is useful context beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as output format or data limitations.

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?

At six words, the description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The phrase 'options' is vague, and 'DEMO' adds a caveat without explaining its implications.

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?

With two required parameters (origin, destination) and an optional cargo_type, an agent needs context about expected inputs and usage. The description provides almost none, leaving the tool's purpose and invocation details severely underdetermined even with an output schema present.

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?

The schema has three parameters (origin, destination, cargo_type) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention any of them. It fails completely to compensate for the schema's lack of semantic meaning.

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 identifies the domain (freight logistics for Kenya SMEs) but lacks a specific verb or action, making it unclear whether the tool lists options, provides guidance, or performs a calculation. It separates the tool from transport siblings by broad topic but not by specific function.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like matatu_route_finder or ntsa_services_guide. The 'Kenya SMEs' framing implies an intended audience but not a decision rule for tool selection.

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