nhtsa_safety_rating_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true owning that this is read-only. The description adds that it requires a VehicleId and returns crash ratings, rollover risk, and safety technology assessments, which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't discuss edge cases like invalid IDs or error handling, but annotations cover the read-only aspect well.

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 sentences with no fluff, and the key prerequisite is front-loaded. It clearly and efficiently conveys all necessary information without redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with a clear schema and read-only annotations, the description is fairly complete. It explains what data is returned and the dependency on search results. However, it doesn't describe the output structure or any pagination, but given it's a detail retrieval tool, the description is adequate.

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 schema provides a description for vehicle_id (VehicleId from safety ratings search) which is clear and covers the parameter, as schema description coverage is 100%. The description reinforces the dependency, so the parameter semantics are adequately explained by the schema, with the description adding no new detail beyond the requirement.

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 it retrieves detailed NHTSA 5-star safety ratings for a specific vehicle variant, distinguishing it from the sibling nhtsa_safety_ratings which likely lists ratings. It names the resource and specific data types returned, which is clear.

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 explicitly states that a VehicleId from nhtsa_safety_ratings search results is required, providing clear context for when to use this tool. It doesn't explicitly compare with siblings, but the dependency is clear. However, it doesn't mention when not to use it or alternatives, which is a minor gap.

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