eta

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a harmless read, but does not state whether it requires an active goal/path, what happens when none is set, or whether it blocks or polls. The only behavioral signal is the verb 'Get'.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key information front-loaded ('Get information about the estimated time...'). No filler, but the brevity leaves the two domain terms unexplained.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and there are no parameters to document. What remains missing is the precondition context — whether the tool is meaningful without an active goal or segment — which matters for a bot-state query tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no arguments whose meaning could be clarified, and the description's mention of 'segment' and 'goal' introduces no ambiguity at the parameter level.

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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Get information about the estimated time') and names the two things it reports: time until the next segment and the goal. The terms 'segment' and 'goal' are domain-specific and undefined, but no sibling overlaps this function, so an agent can identify it.

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?

There is no indication of when to call this versus alternatives such as goal_coordinates, path, or proc, nor any prerequisite context (e.g. whether an active path or goal must exist). The description gives no usage conditions at all.

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