Check Exit IP

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the result reflects a fresh circuit (so the IP may differ per call), which is real behavioral context beyond the name. However, it omits whether this makes a network request, its latency, or whether repeated calls rotate the exit node.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The core answer (the public IP destinations see) comes first and the qualifier is parenthetical.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description supplies what is needed: it names the returned value and its source. Slightly more on return type/format or circuit freshness semantics would make it fully self-contained.

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 tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly signals a no-input utility rather than leaving the empty schema unexplained.

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?

Specific verb ('Return') plus precise resource ('the public IP address that destinations see'), with the parenthetical clarifying it is the Tor exit node. No sibling (fetch_page, search_onion, download_file, extract_links, page_metadata) performs this function, so the agent can distinguish it immediately.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternatives, but the purpose is self-evident enough that usage is strongly implied. A brief note such as 'call this to verify your apparent IP before fetching a page' would raise it.

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