getapi_lookup_postcode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The bracketed '/GET /v1/lookup/postcode' implies a read-only operation, but nothing is said about authentication, rate limits, response shape, or what a missing/invalid postcode yields.

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 short line with the resource and endpoint front-loaded; no filler. It is under-specified rather than bloated, which the other dimensions already penalize.

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 annotations, no output schema, and two parameters at 0% schema coverage, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what 'number' does or what the lookup returns, so it is not complete enough to call the tool confidently.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description adds nothing: 'number' is an untyped empty schema (presumably a house number) and its role is never explained, nor is the required postcode format. The description merely echoes the resource name, so it does not compensate for the low 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?

States a specific verb (lookup) and resource (postcode) scoped to the Netherlands, which is enough to separate it from the DNS, IBAN, KVK and BAG siblings. However, it never says what the postcode resolves to (street, address, coordinates), so the purpose is clear but shallow.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getapi_kadaster_bag_address or getapi_kadaster_bag_address-suggest, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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