Humans have the ability to reason and think critically, so it's pretty trivial to answer unless you think you're getting tricked by a riddle and the answer is the non-intuitive one.

After reading "Knots" by R.D. Laing I always think I'm getting tricked.

You think that the reasonable interpretation of the question is that I want to go to the car wash but not to wash my car there, because I plan to wash my car at home?

Let's replace "car" with another noun for now.

"I want to wash my dog."

is very clearly different from

"I want to have my dog washed."

---

Now, every car wash business I've even been to has a small convenience store section in which various waxes, rags, and the like can be purchased.

---

Considering the aforementioned, is it not valid to consider that

"I want to wash my car." --> You want to DIY your car wash.

and

"The car wash is 50 meters away." --> You might want to purchase car wash supplies and/or solicit advice for your DIY endeavor.

?

---

The nature of the first sentence leaves the second open to interpretation.

> I Want to Wash My Dog. The Dog Wash Is 50 Meters Away. Should I Walk or Drive?

I dunno, that seems pretty clear to me still. Of course the answer to the question is now less obvious, since you can walk your dog to the dog wash but not walk your car to the car wash.

Sure, there are alternate explanations of both sentences, but there is one simplest and most straight-forward explanation. A system that assumes an explanation that is not the most clear, and does not ask clarifying questions, has room for improvement.

If things need to be exactly stated in a structured format that leaves no ambiguity, we already have programming and query languages for that.