Tesla Wake And Refresh

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

The description discloses real side effects — the wake is billed, it brings the car online, it is rate-limited to one wake per 30 minutes and three per 24 hours, plus a hard 3-per-minute cap — which is exactly the kind of state-changing, cost-incurring behavior readOnlyHint=true denies. The annotation profile directly conflicts with the described semantics.

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?

Action and snapshot outcome are front-loaded in the first clause, the confirm gate follows immediately, and the remaining sentences carry only non-obvious operational constraints (budget, hard cap, exclusivity). No filler sentences.

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?

Output schema exists so snapshot contents need no explanation, parameters are documented, and the rate-limit model is fully spelled out for a tool with side effects. The only remaining gap is guidance on when the car is already awake versus which read tool to use instead.

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 both parameters already carry the essential meaning (vin optional for single-car accounts, confirm must be true and is billed). The description's "Refuses unless confirm is true" reinforces the schema but adds no new syntax or edge-case detail beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific two-step action ("Wake the car, then store a fresh snapshot") with a concrete resource, and explicitly claims exclusivity ("This is the only wake path"), which separates it from the passive getters like tesla_get_status and tesla_get_odometer in the sibling list.

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?

Clearly establishes the precondition ("Refuses unless confirm is true") and the routing rule that this is the only way to wake a vehicle, so an agent knows to use it when the car is asleep. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with tesla_get_status for the already-awake case, leaving a small inference gap.

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