initiate_kyc

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the action and return token but omits side effects (e.g., creation of a KYC session, possible user notification), permissions needed, or idempotency. For a tool that likely triggers an external workflow, this is a significant gap.

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 sentence that conveys both the action and the return value. There is no redundant or irrelevant information, and it is easy to scan quickly.

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 low complexity (two optional params, no output schema) and full schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose. However, it lacks behavioral context such as side effects or prerequisites, which is especially important since annotations are absent. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 with descriptions for both parameters (userId and ttlInSecs), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not need to compensate given the full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Initiate') and exact resource ('KYC verification for a user'), and includes the output ('Returns a Sumsub access token'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_kyc_status, which would report on verification state rather than start it.

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 clearly implies this is the tool to begin KYC verification for a user, as opposed to checking status (get_kyc_status). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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