progressive_policy_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns policy details including coverages, deductibles, premium, and renewal date, indicating a read operation. However, it does not cover error scenarios, rate limits, or authorization requirements.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys purpose, lookup methods, and return data without redundancy or wordiness.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately names the key return fields (coverages, deductibles, premium, renewal date). It covers the two lookup modes. However, it lacks information on error handling or what happens if no policy is found.

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%, with each parameter having a clear description. The tool description adds value by clarifying the 'OR' relationship between policy_number and the email+last_name+date_of_birth triplet, which is not explicit in the 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?

The description clearly states the tool looks up an existing Progressive policy by policy number or customer credentials, and lists returned details. This specifically distinguishes it from sibling tools like progressive_get_quote or progressive_claims_status.

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 implies two lookup methods (policy number vs. email+credentials) but does not explicitly state when to prefer one over the other, nor does it mention alternatives from sibling tools. There is no guidance on when not to use this tool.

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