calculate_travel_insurance_estimate

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool returns a premium estimate but does not indicate whether it is a pure read-only calculation (likely) or any side effects. No mention of authentication, rate limits, or data processing details beyond the output.

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 concise at two sentences plus a reference, front-loading the primary purpose. Every part contributes to understanding, though the parameter list is incomplete and slightly misleading.

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 output schema exists, return values are covered. However, the description omits the actual parameter 'coverage_level' and misnames inputs, making it incomplete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. The reference to list_bundles is helpful but does not fill the 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 100% with descriptions for each parameter, providing a baseline of 3. However, the description inaccurately lists 'trip cost' as an input while the schema has 'coverage_level' instead, causing confusion. It adds no meaningful semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 estimates travel insurance cost and lists key inputs (trip cost, age, days, region). However, the input schema does not include 'trip cost' but includes 'coverage_level', creating a mismatch. The reference to list_bundles provides some sibling differentiation, but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling calculate_travel_insurance.

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 only says 'Use for trip planning,' which is vague. It does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like calculate_travel_insurance, nor does it provide any context about prerequisites, limitations, or exclusion criteria.

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