list_riders

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

The description notes the tool is 'Unauthenticated,' which is a behavioral trait. It doesn't disclose other traits like rate limits or side effects, but for a read-only list operation, the provided information is adequate.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists all riders. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy.

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 tool has no parameters, no output schema, and is a simple listing, the description fully specifies the output content by naming all riders and stating it provides definitions and trade-offs. No gaps remain.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. Following the guideline, baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter details as none are needed.

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 it returns structured definitions and trade-offs for specific riders, listing them explicitly. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like compare_carriers or quote_request, which serve different purposes.

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 implicitly indicates when to use: when needing definitions of the listed riders. It doesn't provide explicit when-not or alternatives, but the context is clear given the tool's simplicity and listing of riders.

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