ride_options_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. '(dry-run)' weakly implies a non-committing operation, but nothing is said about authentication via the token parameter, what the confirm flag does, or what side effects (if any) occur. For a 7-parameter tool with zero annotation coverage this is a major gap.

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?

It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness—there is nothing to front-load because almost no information is present. The parenthetical is the only structural element.

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 7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, an agent has essentially no basis to invoke this tool correctly. The description is wholly inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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% across 7 undocumented parameters (token, to/from lat-lng, confirm, service). The description adds no meaning for any of them, not even explaining what the numeric 'service' refers to or the role of 'confirm' in a dry-run. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 essentially a restatement of the tool name ('Ride-options quote') with the parenthetical '(dry-run)' as its only added information. It does not say what a quote returns, what a dry-run means operationally, or how it differs from siblings like ride_price or ride_options_set. It is close to a tautology of the name.

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 guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or which alternatives (ride_price, ride_request) to prefer. The agent is given no conditions to select this tool over its many ride_* siblings.

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