bach-whatsapp_number_validators

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the alternative number suggestion behavior, but omits safety characteristics (idempotency, read-only nature), authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling specifics.

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 with moderate efficiency. The first sentence is somewhat wordy ('utilize a phone number validator to verify the validity') and approaches tautology, while the second sentence delivers useful specific value about alternative numbers.

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?

For a single-parameter tool without output schema, the description partially covers the return behavior by mentioning alternative number suggestions. However, it lacks details on response structure, validation criteria (format vs carrier vs line type), or error states.

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% description coverage with an example value. The description mentions 'given number' but does not add semantic context beyond the schema, such as expected format (E.164), country code requirements, or validation rules.

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 states the core function (validating phone numbers) and a specific feature (providing alternative valid numbers for different countries when invalid). However, it fails to distinguish from siblings like 'validate_single_number_via_get_request' or explain the difference between the GET and POST variants.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not clarify when to choose GET vs POST, single validation vs 'bulk_validation', or this tool vs 'validate_single_number_via_get_request'.

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