lookup_ifsc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions caching to optimize response times, a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose error handling, rate limits, or behavior for invalid IFSC 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?

Two sentences: first sentence states purpose and outputs, second mentions caching. Efficient and front-loaded with essential information, 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, key outputs, and caching behavior. It could mention error responses or return format, but is adequate.

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?

The single parameter 'ifsc' has 100% schema description coverage. The description adds format context (11-character, example) and the data retrieved, going beyond the schema's basic description.

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 retrieves details about an Indian bank branch using IFSC code, listing specific fields like Bank Name, Branch, Address, etc., and distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle GST, pincode, PAN, etc.

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 implies usage when an IFSC code is known, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide when-not-to-use conditions. Sibling tools are different in domain, so confusion is low.

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