Get interface reference

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

Description explicitly states it performs no API call and is offline, implying no destructive or network-dependent behavior. Without annotations, it fully discloses the tool's safe, read-only nature.

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?

Two sentences: first enumerates returned data, second adds offline context. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Description covers what is returned but lacks detail on response structure or format. Given no output schema, a bit more detail would be helpful, but it is adequate for a simple lookup tool.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single optional parameter errorCode. Description references error codes but does not clarify behavior when parameter is omitted (likely returns all). Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds minimal value beyond schema.

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 it returns interface documentation including action values, dispatch centres, etc. It is distinctly different from sibling tools like send_letter or send_fax, making its read-only reference purpose unambiguous.

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?

Description mentions 'Offline lookup, no API call' which implies safe usage, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives. However, given sibling tools are all action-oriented, the context is clear enough.

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