find_inn_by_passport

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool uses the FNS API and notes that availability is not guaranteed, but it does not discuss error handling, rate limits, privacy implications, or what happens on failure. This is insufficient for a tool that may have unpredictable availability.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences. Every word serves a purpose: identifying the resource, input, source, and a caveat. No fluff or repetition.

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 description is minimal and lacks important context such as what the output format is, whether the tool returns a single INN or multiple, and why availability is not guaranteed. Without an output schema, more detail would help the agent understand what to expect.

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 descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add new meaning beyond summarizing the parameters as 'passport data and birthday,' so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Find' and resource 'INN', specifying the input data (passport data and birthday) and the source (FNS API). It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools, which focus on cleaning, suggesting, or finding other entities like companies or addresses.

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 provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool or when not to use it. There is no mention of alternatives among siblings or conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer from the name and context.

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