Search governed municipal licensed-business snapshots without inferring operating health, employment, ownership, or hiring.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | Business-name contains match. | |
| limit | No | Rows to return, 1-200 (default 50). | |
| offset | No | Rows to skip for paging. | |
| subsector | No | Three-digit NAICS subsector code to filter by, e.g. 484. | |
| municipalityId | Yes | Municipality id. Only communities with a reviewed snapshot resolve. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool only returns snapshots and does not infer certain attributes, which is useful context. However, it does not mention return format, pagination behavior, or any other operational traits beyond what the schema already shows.
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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource. It is concise with no filler, and the 'without inferring' clause adds valuable context without wordiness.
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 covers the data domain and a key limitation, and the schema explains parameters. However, it does not specify the output structure (no output schema) and does not clarify how this tool differs from the sibling search_licensed_businesses, leaving some contextual gaps.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond implying municipality context, 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 it searches 'governed municipal licensed-business snapshots', which is a specific verb+resource. The additional 'without inferring operating health, employment, ownership, or hiring' clause defines scope, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly-named sibling search_licensed_businesses.
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 'without inferring' phrase provides a clear when-not: if the user needs inferences about operating health, employment, ownership, or hiring, this tool is not appropriate. However, it does not name alternative tools that would provide those inferences, so it falls short of full guidance.
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.
Several tools are effectively duplicates or near-duplicates: get_emerging_signals is an explicit alias for list_economic_signals, resolve_entity and resolve_entities overlap heavily, and the markdown variants duplicate their non-markdown reports. Pairs like compare_communities/compare_municipalities and search_businesses/search_licensed_businesses also require reading long contracts to avoid misselection.
Tool names overwhelmingly follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern with sensible verbs like get_, list_, search_, and compare_. The main deviations are the backwards-compatible get_emerging_signals alias and prefix choices such as check_business_health vs get_business_health that obscure the underlying distinction.
70 tools is an extreme surface for any MCP server, far beyond the 25+ 'too many' threshold. The set is fragmented by format variants, aliases, and multiple overlapping lookup tools, making selection and maintenance costly.
The domain surface is broad: entity resolution, business health, labour, community economy, procurement, and governance evidence are all covered in depth. However, there are notable lifecycle gaps—no sandbox deletion, consent revocation, health-action cancellation, or actual exchange/connect/apply step—that leave agents with dead ends.
