lookup_reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search' but does not explain return format, pagination, ordering, or whether the operation is read-only. No side effects or limitations (e.g., language restrictions) are mentioned.

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, concise sentence that lists the supported directories. It front-loads the key information without unnecessary words, but the structure is flat and could benefit from grouping or examples.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain how results are structured, how to form effective queries, or what to expect from each directory. For a multi-directory search tool, more context is needed for proper usage.

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 schema already covers 2 of 3 parameters with descriptions (query and directory). The description adds no new information about parameters; it merely repeats directory names from the schema. The missing 'count' parameter description is not compensated, so the description provides minimal additional value beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the tool searches Russian reference directories and lists 11 specific directories (OKVED, OKPD, etc.). The verb 'Search' and resource 'Russian reference directories' clearly defines its purpose, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on cleaning or finding specific entities.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as find_bank for bank details or suggest_fio for name suggestions. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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