Abuse Contact Lookup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; the description reinforces that. It adds beyond annotations by disclosing cost, caching behavior via force_refresh, and the exact return structure. Slight deduction because no mention of rate limits or auth beyond 'paid only'.

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?

Four focused sentences, each serving a purpose. Front-loaded with core purpose and cost. No redundancy or unnecessary details.

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 no output schema, the description details the return structure and fields. Covers caching, force_refresh behavior, and best practice (one call per IP). Contextually complete for a straightforward lookup tool.

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%, so each parameter is documented. The description adds value by explaining the field path convention and reiterating the condition for force_refresh. It also clarifies that excluding fields reduces response size.

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 it performs a read-only abuse contact lookup via a specific endpoint. It differentiates from the sibling tool lookup_ip by specifying when to use that alternative (when additional data like location or security is needed).

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool versus lookup_ip, mentions cost (1 credit), and recommends calling once per IP and post-processing locally. Provides clear context for use.

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