Tesla Get Status

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior, so the description wisely adds operational context: live versus cached responses and the fact that the call does not wake the vehicle. It also specifies miles as the distance unit returned by the Fleet API.

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 short and front-loaded with the returned status fields. Each sentence adds useful information: data freshness, distance units, and the non-waking behavior.

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 the available output schema, rich annotations, and fully documented single parameter, the description provides everything needed for correct invocation. It covers status contents, freshness semantics, units, and wake behavior without redundant return-value explanation.

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%, and the optional vin parameter is fully documented in the schema as a vehicle name or masked VIN that can be omitted for single-car accounts. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource contents: battery, range, charging, and lock state. It is specific enough to distinguish this status tool from siblings like tesla_get_climate, tesla_get_odometer, and tesla_get_software, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 note that data is live when the car is online and otherwise cached, plus the statement that it does not wake the car, gives useful contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this versus tesla_wake_and_refresh or when cached data is insufficient.

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