get_ip_info

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive behavior, which are consistent with the GET method. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond a mention of 'Python SDK parity,' which does not disclose return format, rate limits, or any side effects. With annotations present, the description still fails to provide useful behavioral detail.

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 minimal, but its brevity comes at the cost of omitting the tool's core purpose. It is not wasteful, but it also doesn't earn its place because it simply restates the endpoint. This is under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., IP address details). It does not. The one optional parameter and read-only nature are not enough to compensate for the lack of return-value documentation. The description is incomplete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema includes one optional boolean parameter, dry_run, described in Russian as 'Show request without sending to API.' Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameter; the tool description adds no parameter information. Baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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 consists solely of the HTTP method and endpoint ('GET /api/v2/ip') and a compatibility note ('WhiteLabel (Python SDK parity)'). It does not explicitly state that this tool retrieves IP address information, leaving the agent to infer from the name. This is a vague purpose statement rather than a clear verb+resource description.

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 contains no guidance about when to use this tool, what scenarios it applies to, or alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites, offering zero usage direction.

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