Get a VirusTotal IP address report

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the lookup does not contact the address, VTAI normalizes input, query quota applies, and a missing report does not establish safety. These are non-obvious behaviors that materially affect agent expectations and are not present in the annotations alone.

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?

Three concise sentences deliver the core purpose, input constraints, and an important interpretation caveat. There is no filler, and each sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with strong annotations and in-description parameter guidance, the description covers correct invocation and interpretation of results. The lack of an output schema is not a critical gap because the report nature is clear from the title and purpose.

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 provides only a bare 'ip' string with no description, so the description carries the full semantic burden. It thoroughly explains what an acceptable address looks like: IPv4 or IPv6, no brackets, port, zone, or CIDR suffix, and mentions normalization behavior.

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 verb ('look up') and resource ('existing intelligence for one IPv4 or IPv6 address'), which is specific and easy to distinguish from file, URL, or domain tools. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the address-type framing makes the 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?

The description gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: looking up existing IP intelligence without contacting the address. It also provides concrete input-format guidance and a safety caveat, though it does not explicitly state when to use an alternative sibling instead.

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