decode_digilocker_uri

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and an open-world hint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds that the tool does not simply decode the URI but also maps it to a validator, clarifying the expected conversion behavior beyond what the annotations alone provide.

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 clearly conveys the main purpose and behavior. The appended '# PermissionTier: READ_ONLY' is redundant with the annotations but does not meaningfully bloat the description, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 only one parameter, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It does not elaborate on how the 'map to validator' result should be used or how it relates to sibling validate_* tools, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for the description to enumerate return values.

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?

There is only one parameter, and the schema description covers it completely ('DigiLocker document URI'), so the schema already documents the needed meaning. The description adds no extra information about format, URI structure, examples, or constraints, so a baseline score 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 states the specific action ('Decode') on a specific resource ('DigiLocker document URI') and adds that it maps the URI to a validator. This clearly identifies the tool's role and distinguishes it from other decode_* siblings, though it could be slightly more explicit about the final output.

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 implies a usage context: a DigiLocker URI should be decoded and then routed to a validator. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over the many validate_* or other decode_* siblings, and it gives no exclusions or comparative guidance.

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