bank_from_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool uses only the first 6 digits / BIN, but it omits whether the input is validated, what the return value looks like, and how unknown or malformed BINs are handled.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core operation and the relevant input portion efficiently.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and error behavior. It says what the tool identifies but not what an agent receives back or what happens for unrecognized BINs, leaving the definition incomplete for a lookup utility.

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% and the only parameter is an undescribed string. The description adds meaningful semantics by specifying that the parameter is a card number and that only the first 6 digits / BIN are used, but it does not specify format constraints such as digit-only input or accepted lengths.

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 ('Identify') and resource ('Iranian bank') and states the exact input ('card number (first 6 digits / BIN)'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings such as validate_card_number (validation) and bank_from_sheba (sheba-based 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 does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. An agent can infer that it is used when a card BIN is available, but no explicit usage guidance is provided.

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