zip_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'проверка' (check), which weakly implies a read-only lookup, but it does not mention return format, error behavior, external API calls, rate limits, or any 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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to stating the action and object, making it easy to parse quickly.

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-required-parameter tool with clear domain context, the description covers the invocation essentials. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the tool returns, so the agent cannot know whether the result is a simple boolean, a status code, or a structured delivery-availability object.

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 100%: the zip parameter is fully described as 'Почтовый индекс для проверки зоны доставки Boxberry'. The tool description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which matches the baseline for high 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Проверка почтового индекса' (check postal code) for 'доступность доставки Boxberry' (Boxberry delivery availability). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_cities, list_points, and calc_delivery, which serve different purposes.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as calc_delivery or list_cities. There are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or 'use instead' hints, so an agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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