clean_phone

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

No annotations provided, but the description covers key behavior: validation, standardization, paid call (0.20 RUB/req), and return fields. It does not disclose error handling or rate limits, but for a simple tool this is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant information. First sentence states the primary action, second lists return data and cost. Very efficient and easy to parse.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers functionality, return fields, and cost. No apparent gaps given the low complexity.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'phone' with minimal description. The tool description adds significant meaning by explaining the purpose (validation and standardization) and the enriched output, which goes beyond the schema's 'Phone number in any format'.

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 a specific verb ('Validate and standardize') and resource ('a phone number'), and distinguishes from sibling 'clean_' tools by mentioning unique return values (carrier, region, timezone, type).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like other clean_ tools or when it is inappropriate. Only cost is mentioned, which is a minor usage hint.

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