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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose safety and side effects. It mentions billing per call, which is useful, but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, any rate limits, or what happens on invalid inputs. Missing critical behavioral context for a tool with no annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The billing mention is relevant. No unnecessary fluff, but could have included more behavioral context in the same space.

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's moderate complexity (nested object param, no output schema), the description is minimal but provides the essential purpose and billing. However, it lacks details on error handling, response format, and usage guidelines, making it 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents the 'body' parameter. The description adds the example structure in the schema itself, and the description does not add much beyond that. It does not clarify the expected format of passport and destination codes beyond the example.

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 shows visa rules for a passport to destination, using 'Show' as a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'Group: V2' and 'Billing per call: 1 Credits', but does not explicitly contrast with other visa-related tools like post_v2_visa_map.

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?

It implies usage by describing the function (show visa rules) and mentions the billing cost, but does not explicitly state when to use this over siblings like post_v2_visa_map or post_v2_passport_rank_custom. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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