Car telemetry

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

Annotations already cover the safe-read profile, and the description usefully adds the volume warning ('VERY large data'), the ~3.7 Hz resolution and the mandatory scoping. However, the instruction 'ONE driver_number' directly conflicts with the schema, which accepts an integer array of up to 30 drivers, so the guidance could cause an agent to reject valid multi-driver calls.

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?

Two tightly written sentences, front-loaded with what the data is and followed immediately by the volume warning and the required scoping. No filler whatsoever.

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?

Covers purpose, resolution, volume and mandatory filters for an eight-parameter, read-only tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema. The one gap is the incorrect singular driver constraint, which is the main thing an agent could get wrong.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description goes beyond it by imposing the lap_number-or-date-range exclusivity and the 10-minute window, neither of which appears in the schema. The driver_number restriction it adds is, however, wrong relative to 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?

States a specific resource (car telemetry) plus the exact signals returned (speed, RPM, gear, throttle, brake, DRS) and the sampling rate, which cleanly separates it from siblings like get_laps, get_location and get_intervals. An agent can pick this tool without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete prerequisites ('you must give session_key, ONE driver_number and a lap_number or a date range') and an explicit bound (max 10 minutes), which is real when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g. get_laps for aggregated lap data) or stating when not to use it.

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