validate_ipCheck whether an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Sogou Spider IP address, verified against Sogou Spider's published IP data on seoapi.com.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ip | Yes | The IPv4 or IPv6 address to validate |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description reveals that validation relies on external published data from seoapi.com, which implies a dependency on external sources. However, it does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, response time, or what happens if the IP is invalid. Without annotations, more detail would be beneficial.
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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the essential information without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and target.
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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers its purpose and verification source. It could optionally mention return values or error handling, but the current level is sufficient for typical use.
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?
The input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'ip' with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 purpose: to check if an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Sogou Spider IP, verified against published data from seoapi.com. The verb 'validate' and the specific resource 'Sogou Spider IP' provide precise and unambiguous intent.
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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (though no siblings are listed). It implies use for verifying Sogou Spider IPs but lacks context about when not to use it or any prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
With only one tool, there is no risk of confusion or misselection among tools. The single tool has a clear and unique purpose.
Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained. The name 'validate_ip' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.
A single tool is too few for a server, making it feel overly narrow. For a web spider verification service, additional tools like listing known IPs or batch validation would be expected.
The tool performs its stated function (IP validation) correctly, but the server lacks other related operations such as retrieving the full list of Sogou spider IPs or checking multiple IPs, which are notable gaps.