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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no further behavioral context, such as what verification entails, return format, or side effects. The prefix 'Free:' is ambiguous and does not contribute to transparency.

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 very short and front-loaded, but the 'Free:' prefix is unnecessary and detracts from clarity. It is concise but under-specified, not striking the right balance.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a boolean, a verification report). It also fails to describe what a 'signed decision passport' is or how it is verified, leaving significant gaps for a tool with a nested object parameter.

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 schema has one param 'passport' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only implies that the passport object should be a 'signed decision passport', but does not explain its structure or required fields, leaving the agent to guess.

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 verb 'verify' and the resource 'a signed decision passport', making the core purpose evident. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like verify_company_passport, though 'signed decision passport' is a distinct object type.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no contextual cues. The description only gives a bare definition without any usage context.

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