verify_passport

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the cryptographic check, expiry verification, return structure, and offline nature (no network required). No destructive or authorization hints are needed for a read-only verification tool.

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 no fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds key details (checks, return, context). Perfectly sized.

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?

Missing details on failure behavior (throws error vs. returns invalid flag) and passport object structure. Simple tool but lacks completeness for an agent to construct the input correctly.

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% but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's minimal description. The nested passport object lacks documentation of its required fields (e.g., signature, issuer), leaving the agent under-informed.

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 action (verify a passport offline), specific checks (Ed25519 signature and expiry), and return value structure. It distinguishes from siblings (exchange_credentials, issue_passport) by emphasizing offline verification.

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 implies usage for offline verification, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. No prerequisites or constraints are provided beyond offline context.

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