find_ship

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully identifies live Spansh shipyard lists as the data source, but it does not explain how 'near you' is resolved from the location-related parameters, whether results are sorted by distance, or how journal_dir and system_name affect behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. The parenthetical source note adds useful context, though the overall brevity contributes to the missing parameter and usage details.

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 seven-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description is too thin. It identifies the data source and general purpose, but it omits how location is resolved, how the search is scoped, and what the location-related parameters mean.

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 0% for seven parameters, so the description needs to compensate. It only implies the meaning of ship_query and a proximity concept; it does not explain x/y/z coordinates, system_name, journal_dir, or max_results, leaving most parameters undocumented.

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 that the tool finds stations selling a specified ship near the user, using live Spansh shipyard lists. It is specific about the resource and data source, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_station_shipyard or find_stored_ship.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_station_shipyard, find_stored_ship, or spansh_search_stations. The phrase 'near you' implies a proximity search, but there are no stated prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-selection rules.

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