ride_request

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and mostly fails: it never says whether a real booking occurs, what 'confirm' does, whether a token is required, or what side effects follow. The '(dry-run)' hint is the only behavioral disclosure, and it is contradicted by 'REAL RIDE' in the same line.

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?

Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than economy; the single fragment is ambiguous instead of front-loading useful information. It is short but earns nothing.

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?

A nine-parameter, zero-annotation, no-output-schema tool needs substantial description, and this provides one ambiguous fragment. An agent cannot safely invoke it.

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?

Nine parameters at 0% schema description coverage with zero explanatory text in the description. Critical semantics — token auth, the confirm flag, service selection, and the origin/dest vs from-lat/from-lng duality — are entirely undocumented.

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 restates the tool name ('request a ride') rather than explaining it, and the parenthetical '(dry-run)' muddies rather than clarifies — it is unclear whether this actually books a ride or merely simulates one. There is no differentiation from siblings such as ride_options_quote or ride_price.

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 when-to-use guidance, no preconditions, and no mention of alternatives in a sibling set containing dozens of ride_* tools. An agent has no basis for choosing this over ride_options_quote or ride_status.

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