newdb_check_passport_mvd

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a 'check' is performed, but does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, if it has side effects, requires special permissions, or describes the response format. For a tool without annotations, this is insufficient transparency.

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 a single, focused sentence that states the purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded and concise, with no extraneous information.

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?

The tool has no output schema and lacks annotations, so the description should explain the expected return value and any prerequisites. It only says 'check validity' without clarifying what the result looks like (e.g., boolean, status message). For a tool with four required parameters and no output schema, this is incomplete.

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 100% coverage with descriptive parameter explanations (e.g., '4-digit passport series', 'Last name in Russian'). The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 function: 'Check Russian internal passport validity via official MVD registry database.' It specifies the verb 'Check' and the resource (passport validity), making it distinct from sibling tools that check other domains (bankruptcy, FSSP, 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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or mention alternatives. It implies usage for passport validation, but there is no discussion of exclusions or comparison to other tools. The context is clear but not explicit, falling short of strong guidance.

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