Callback IP Lookup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations by detailing the exact return categories (attack stage, scanner associations, RIOT status, geo/network enrichment, downloaded malware files). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Single sentence front-loaded with the main action, followed by a precise list of return fields. No wasted words; every phrase earns its place.

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?

Tool has one simple parameter and an output schema (not shown but indicated). Description fully explains what the tool does and what it returns, with no gaps. Annotations cover safety. Complete for agent selection.

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 100% for the single parameter 'ip', which is described as 'The callback IP address to look up'. The description does not add further parameter-level detail, but the high schema coverage meets the baseline. Description clarifies the return types, indirectly supporting parameter understanding.

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?

Description starts with a specific verb ('Look up') and resource ('single callback/C2 IP'), then enumerates return fields like attack stage, scanner associations, RIOT status, geo/network enrichment, and downloaded malware files. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'list-callback-ips' (list) and 'quick-check-ip' (simpler check).

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?

Implies use for individual lookups via 'single callback/C2 IP', but provides no explicit context about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'multi-ip-check' or 'bsi-lookup'. No when-not-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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