nhtsa_complaint_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that it retrieves a specific complaint, consistent with read-only behavior. No additional behavioral details (e.g., permissions, rate limits) are provided, but the annotation covers the essential safety profile.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no redundant information. Every sentence adds value, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter, annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains what the tool does and how to obtain the required parameter. It could be improved by briefly describing the expected output, but this is not essential given the tool's straightforward nature.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for 'odi_number'. The description adds context that ODI numbers come from search results, which is helpful but not critical beyond the schema. With full schema coverage, the description provides marginal added value.

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 the purpose: 'Get a specific complaint by its ODI number.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'specific complaint' are explicit. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'nhtsa_complaints' by focusing on a single complaint via ODI number, and includes an example for clarity.

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 mentions that 'ODI numbers are in complaint search results,' which implies the tool is used after finding an ODI number via search. It provides clear context for when to use it but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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