tochka_consent

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the safety and partial result behavior. The description adds no further behavioral insights (e.g., error handling, caching, or side effects), but does not contradict annotations.

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 very short and front-loaded with the purpose. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter, but a sentence about the expected result or usage context would improve it without adding bulk.

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 the tool's simplicity (one required param, no enums), annotations, and output schema, the description covers the basic interaction. However, it lacks context on what a 'consent' is and how this tool relates to nearby siblings like 'tochka_consents', making it slightly incomplete for an agent with no prior knowledge.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. However, the description only repeats the parameter name and a generic 'Consent identifier', which is already present in the schema title. No additional meaning or constraints are provided.

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 states 'Get consent details' which clearly indicates retrieving information about a consent. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'tochka_consents' (likely list) or 'tochka_consent_children', but the required consent_id parameter implies a single resource lookup.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or context such as when to use 'tochka_consents' instead.

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