get_national_id

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose the important behavioral trait that the user is prompted for consent before data is returned, which is valuable. However, it omits other behavioral details such as behavior on consent denial, missing document, or when multiple national IDs exist and document_id is required.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every clause adds value. The consent sentence is essential behavioral context and is not redundant.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient: it states what is retrieved, that fields are specific, and that consent is required. It could be slightly more complete by describing the return shape or failure behavior, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 the schema already explains the fields, purpose, and document_id parameters. The description reinforces 'specific fields' and consent but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, such as value formatting, enumeration semantics, or edge-case behavior for optional document_id.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('stored national identity card'), and adds the scope 'specific fields', distinguishing it from generic get_document and identity-specific siblings like get_passport and get_driving_license. The consent note further clarifies the core action.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, nor are sibling alternatives mentioned. However, the intended context is implied clearly: use this tool to pull selected fields from a national ID card. It lacks exclusions or comparison with get_document or other identity getters.

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