network_whois

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention idempotency, rate limits, data freshness, or any side effects. The agent is given no indication of what happens during a query (e.g., external network call, caching).

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?

The description is brief with three sentences, but the first sentence 'Menu ID: whois.' is unnecessary for an agent. The main action and a helpful pointer to describe_tool are present. It could be more concise by removing the menu ID line.

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?

For a simple query tool with no output schema and minimal parameters, the description provides a basic purpose and a pointer to more details. However, it lacks information on return format, error handling, or any constraints, making it only minimally complete.

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% with both parameters described. The description repeats that the host is a 'domain name or public IP address' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The worker_id parameter is not mentioned in the description, so no additional value is provided.

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 'Whois Lookup. Query WHOIS registration or allocation data for a domain name or public IP address.' This provides a specific verb (query) and resource (WHOIS data for domain or IP), distinguishing it from sibling tools like network_dns or network_asn_lookup.

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 instructs to 'Use describe_tool with tool_id "whois" for full page guidance,' but does not provide explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No differentiation from sibling network tools is given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name.

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