freight_truck_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It adds useful context: truck-legal constraints, inclusion of tolls/weigh stations/truck stops, turn-by-turn maneuvers, and a cost of $0.50 USDC per call. However, it doesn't mention return format, failure handling, or how truck profile affects routing, which leaves some gaps.

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 two sentences: the first packs all functional details, the second provides pricing. No wasted words, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and easily scannable.

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 tool with six parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is only partially complete. It clarifies the core functionality and some output aspects (turn-by-turn), but lacks details on how optional parameters modify behavior, what the route response looks like, and error/edge-case behavior. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 only 33% (origin and truck have descriptions). The tool description does not compensate for the undocumented parameters: via_points, include_truck_stops, include_weigh_stations, destination, and the truck profile subfields are not explained. It only vaguely mentions 'truck-legal' without linking to the truck object's meaning.

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 the tool's function: 'Truck-legal routing between origin and destination' with specific features like tolls, weigh stations, truck stops, and turn-by-turn maneuvers. This distinguishes it from siblings such as freight_calculate_tolls, which focuses solely on toll calculation.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose: use for truck-legal route planning. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., freight_calculate_tolls for toll-only calculations) or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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