otx_ip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the return fields (pulse info, reputation, country, ASN) but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or other operational caveats. For a simple read-only lookup, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, tight sentence of 19 words, front-loading the action and source, then immediately listing return data. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose and return content. However, it lacks guidance on when to choose this tool over alternative IP intelligence sources (AbuseIPDB, GreyNoise, etc.), which is a notable gap in the broader context.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single 'ip' parameter, including its description ('IPv4 address to look up'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 applies.

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 tool performs an IP address lookup via AlienVault OTX, using a specific verb ('look up') and resource. It also enumerates return values (pulse info, reputation, country, ASN), distinguishing it from sibling OTX tools for other IOC types.

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 provides clear context: this tool is for IP address threat intelligence. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is specific enough for an agent to recognize when IP lookup is intended.

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