statefarm_policy_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. 'Retrieve' and 'Returns' clearly signal a read-only lookup, and the listed outputs (coverage summary, deductibles, premium info, renewal date, insured items/people) give a concrete behavioral contract. It does not discuss auth or errors, but none are suggested as relevant for a simple lookup.

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 entire description is one sentence that front-loads the action and then packs the returned fields into a concise list. No filler or redundant 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?

For a tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the operation and enumerates the return content. The schema covers the parameters, so the only minor gap is that the description does not explain when policy_number should be supplied vs. using 'all'.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema, but the schema already documents policy_type and policy_number, including the enum values and the 'all' option.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and names the resource ('existing State Farm insurance policy'), and lists the return contents. It is clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like statefarm_get_quote or statefarm_claim_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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over the siblings. The word 'existing' hints that it is not for new quotes, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, and no mention of alternatives.

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