Send remote command (action)

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, signaling mutation. The description adds important behavioral context: the need for confirmation and that the tool is disabled in read-only backends. This goes beyond the annotations by clarifying operational constraints.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and then add critical usage constraints. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 absence of an output schema and moderate parameter coverage, the description effectively covers the tool's core function and key constraints. It is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to invoke this tool, especially in context with the sibling tools.

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 covers 67% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by summarizing the command types and explicitly stating that confirm must be true, which reinforces the schema's default false. It does not explain the 'locate' command beyond listing it, but the enum is self-explanatory.

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: sending remote commands to a vehicle, with examples (lock, climate, locate). It distinguishes from sibling tools that are focused on diagnostics (DTCs, health, etc.), making it easy for an agent to select this tool for action-oriented tasks.

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 includes explicit usage guidance: 'Requires confirm=true' and 'Disabled for read-only backends (e.g. Salesforce).' This helps the agent know when to use the tool and when it is unavailable. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tools provide a natural contrast.

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