Quote a crate

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds the key consequence: an email is actually dispatched to the customer with the full quote, which is not derivable from the schema. It restates the non-read-only nature redundantly but otherwise adds real behavioral context.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the side-effect disclosure trailing. Minor waste in repeating 'not read-only' after annotations already say so.

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?

An output schema exists so return values are adequately covered, but with 9 parameters and a mutating email side effect, the description leaves the optional configuration flags and any failure behavior unexplained. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 56%; the description restates that dimensions are inside-inches and that the email receives the full quote, but says nothing about the five optional flags (lid, quantity, heavy_floor, auto_forklift, forklift_base), which are undocumented in both schema and description. Adds only marginal meaning over 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 verb and resource ('Quote a crate') plus the exact input basis (inside width/height/length in inches) and the output (price range, config code, layout). It doesn't differentiate itself from the sibling quote_crate_by_code, which is likely the closest alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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 context ('for a customer email') implies when to use it, and the note that it submits a full-quote request hints at side effects, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. quote_crate_by_code / crate_size_limits guidance or any stated preconditions.

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