cdek_passport

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool performs a read operation (GET) and requires at least one parameter. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or failure behaviors, leaving some gaps.

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 concise, with key information front-loaded (Russian then English, though some redundancy). The Args section is clear and structured. It could be slightly more streamlined but is well-sized.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and a core constraint (provide at least one parameter). It does not detail error handling or permissions, but for a straightforward GET endpoint, it is mostly complete.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description adds crucial meaning: it explains that cdek_number is a tracking number, order_uuid is an order UUID, and client is a filter that defaults to both sender and recipient. This goes beyond the raw 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 the tool's purpose: retrieving passport data for customs readiness of international orders. It specifies the HTTP method and endpoint (GET /v2/passport) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which focus on passport data.

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 provides context for when to use the tool: for passport information related to transferring orders to customs for international orders. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but 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.