lookup_okpd2

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

With no annotations, the description adequately discloses behavioral traits: offline operation and data source (vendored vs full directory). It adds value beyond the schema by clarifying the offline nature, though it could mention that results are limited to available codes.

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 three sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes essential context.

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?

The description is complete for a simple lookup tool, given the presence of an output schema and full parameter descriptions. It explains the data source and offline nature, but could briefly mention return format or result behavior.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for parameters (query, limit, code_type).

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 tool finds OKPD2/KTRU codes via full-text search. It specifies the verb 'Найти' and the resource 'код ОКПД2 / КТРУ', distinguishing it from unrelated sibling tools.

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 explains that the tool uses a vendored directory (top codes) or full directory after CI-upload, and that it requires no network calls. It does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear given unrelated siblings.

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