get_ip_city

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default behavior (returns current city if IP is None) and the return type (city name), but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, data sources, or privacy implications. It provides basic behavioral context but misses advanced traits.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by clear Arg and Returns sections. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, parameter semantics, and return type adequately, though it could benefit from more behavioral context like error cases or data freshness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'ip' parameter's purpose and the special case when None (returns current city), adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema's basic type and default. However, it doesn't specify format constraints (e.g., IPv4 vs. IPv6) or validation rules.

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 the specific action ('Get just the city') and resource ('for an IP address'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_ip_country, get_ip_region, or get_ip_info. It precisely defines the scope of what is returned.

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 implicitly suggests usage for retrieving city-level information from an IP, with the default behavior (no IP provided) returning the current city. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like get_ip_location or get_ip_info, which might provide more comprehensive data.

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