luceed_partneri

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says 'lookup,' which weakly implies read-only behavior, but it does not disclose permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, return shape, or action-specific side effects.

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 compact sentence, front-loading the resource and lookup purpose before listing actions. It is not verbose, though the action list largely duplicates the schema enum.

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 multi-action tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain action-specific parameter requirements, pagination, or what the lookup returns.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 12 parameters. The description repeats the action enum but does not explain how the action determines which parameters matter, such as when to use oib versus dio_naziva versus partner_uid.

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 a specific verb/resource pair: partner master data lookup for partners/customers, and enumerates the available action names. It is clear what the tool is for, though it does not distinguish itself from siblings such as luceed_users or luceed_cjenik_partner.

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?

It gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites. The only implied usage is that it is a lookup tool for partner data.

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