Return full per-field details for one pinui-binui compound by slug or numeric id. Use when user wants to drill into a specific compound (e.g. "tell me more about קהילת קליבלנד").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug_or_id | Yes | Compound slug (preferred) or numeric id as string. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It indicates a read operation and scope ('full per-field details'), but lacks specifics on authentication, rate limits, or response structure.
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 concise, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words.
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 retrieval tool with one parameter, the description covers invocation and purpose. Could optionally mention that details are 'per-field', but overall complete given lack of output schema.
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 coverage is 100% with a clear parameter description. The description adds usage context ('by slug or numeric id') and an example, but does not significantly enhance meaning 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 clearly states the action ('Return full per-field details') and the resource ('one pinui-binui compound'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_compounds or list_top_mispriced_compounds.
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?
Explicitly states when to use ('when user wants to drill into a specific compound') with an example, but does not provide exclusions or alternative tool references.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct lookups: search, detail, methodology, plan status, registry, recent changes, and top-ranked opportunities. There is some overlap in statutory status returns between get_compound_details, urban_renewal_registry, and planning_status_by_plan, but their descriptions clarify the source and scope enough to avoid major confusion.
The naming mixes verb-led patterns like get_, list_, and search_ with noun-style names like planning_status_by_plan and urban_renewal_registry. It is still readable and mostly predictable, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun convention makes the pattern less consistent.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a domain-specific analyzer server. Each tool addresses a distinct user need, and the count feels neither thin nor bloated.
The surface covers core analysis workflows: searching, retrieving detailed compound data, checking official registry status, inspecting live plan status, seeing recent statutory changes, and finding top mispriced opportunities. Minor gaps exist—like a general list/filter tool or historical comparison—but agents can work around them.