search_visa_rules

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

No annotations are provided; description carries full burden. Describes return format but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a search tool, this is a notable gap.

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?

Well-structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is informative and earns its place. Front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words.

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 simple schema (1 param) and no annotations, the description is fairly complete: explains input and output format. Lacks details on behavior (e.g., read-only) but covers essential usage info. Output schema exists, so return values are partially covered.

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 0%, so description compensates well with detailed explanation of 'scenario' parameter: 'Free-text description of the dispute (cardholder claim, merchant response, transaction type, etc.).' Adds meaning beyond the schema but lacks details on length or format.

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 clearly states the tool searches VISA Dispute Management Guidelines for rules relevant to a dispute. Uses specific verb 'search' and resource 'VISA rules'. Distinguishes from sibling query_warehouse by being specialized for visa disputes.

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?

Provides explicit context: use when searching for VISA rules for a dispute. Args section explains input scenario. Does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the specialization is clear.

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