get_return_rental_info

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe read operation. The description adds value by listing returned fields (estimatedRefundTrx, remaining rent, etc.), providing behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose prerequisites or side effects, but these are not needed for a read-only tool.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key output fields. Every word contributes value; no wasted text.

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 tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema, read-only), the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns. It covers all necessary information for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 the description does not need to detail parameters. It adds no new meaning beyond the schema, which already describes the three parameters. The baseline of 3 is appropriate given high coverage.

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 'Get estimated refund info for returning/canceling an energy rental,' identifying the resource (energy rental) and the specific information provided. It distinguishes from siblings like 'return_energy_rental' (which performs the return) and other 'get_*' tools.

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 implies usage when considering returning or canceling a rental but does not explicitly specify when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings. It lacks explicit context on exclusion or comparison with similar tools.

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