list_game_vehicles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds value beyond that by disclosing a failure mode and its remedy — "fails when the folder is missing (set SW_VEHICLES_DIR)" — plus that results are sorted. It doesn't say what an empty folder or a folder with non-vehicle files yields, so not a full 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then routing, then the failure caveat. No filler; each sentence carries distinct information.

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?

Single optional parameter, full schema coverage, output schema present (so return shape needn't be explained), and read-only annotations. The description covers the one non-obvious operational fact — the required SW_VEHICLES_DIR — and nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% and the 'search' parameter is fully documented in-schema (case-insensitive substring; empty = all). The description does not restate or extend the search semantics — "Pass a name to ..." describes downstream flow, not the filter — so baseline 3 is correct.

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?

Specific verb + resource + scope: "List the vehicle names in the player's Stormworks vehicles folder, sorted." It also distinguishes itself from list_designs ("Drafts stored on this server are listed by list_designs"), so an agent can tell the two list tools apart immediately.

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?

Explicit downstream routing: "Pass a name to preview_game_vehicle, inspect_view, analyze_vehicle or import_vehicle." It also carves out the boundary against the sibling list_designs, giving both when-to-use and when-not-to-use in two sentences.

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