ride_debts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: not whether the call is read-only, whether authentication via the token field is required, whether results are paginated, or what the debt record contains. A two-word fragment gives no behavioral context at all.

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?

Two words is short but this is under-specification rather than conciseness; there is no front-loaded action statement or scope to anchor the agent. It fails the 'every sentence earns its place' test by omission rather than excess.

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 no annotations, no output schema, no parameter documentation, and no return description, the definition supplies nothing an agent needs in order to invoke the tool correctly. It is materially incomplete for even a simple read endpoint.

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 0% and the 0-required, 1-optional 'token' field is undocumented. The description adds no meaning to that parameter, though the name 'token' is largely self-describing as an auth credential, which keeps this just above the floor.

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 is a bare noun phrase, 'Outstanding debts', which essentially restates the tool name ride_debts without a verb or any distinguishing scope. It does not differentiate this tool from closely named siblings such as ride_balance, ride_wallets, or ride_debt_pay. There is no statement of what action is performed (list? retrieve? total?).

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 whatsoever on when to use this tool, what preconditions apply, or which sibling to pick instead. Notably, ride_debt_pay exists for actually settling debt, so a when-not clause would have been valuable. The agent is left to infer everything.

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