progressive_get_quote

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or creates data, does not mention authentication, rate limits, or side effects. The term 'Get' may mislead about mutability.

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?

Single sentence, 22 words, front-loaded with action and returns. No redundant phrasing. Could benefit from slight structuring (e.g., bullet points) but remains concise.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain returns. It mentions premium range, coverage options, and quote ID but is vague (e.g., not specifying that driver info is required for auto). Lacks details on error handling or required nested objects.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Tool description adds context about insurance types and returns but does not enhance per-parameter meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it gets an insurance quote for auto, home, or renters policies from Progressive, and lists specific returns (premium range, coverage options, quote ID). This differentiates it from sibling tools like policy lookup or claims.

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?

Implies usage for obtaining quotes but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., progressive_coverage_recommendations). No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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