FEODE certifications: BV + CCS classification of the subsea wellhead system (incl. references), 8 API monogram licenses, PSL 4S, ISO 9001/14001/45001, national awards.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. The description adds the specific certifications and standards included, which provides behavioral context beyond the annotations.
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 succinct sentence that front-loads the key content. It is concise and to the point, though it could be structured more clearly as a statement of function.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description provides the list of certifications but does not explain the return format or structure. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.
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 are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, but with no parameters, the baseline is 4.
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 tool name 'get_certifications' combined with the description listing specific certifications clearly indicates the tool retrieves certification information. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_company_profile', which might also include certifications.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios where this is appropriate or when other tools like 'get_company_profile' might be better suited.
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.
Tools are mostly distinct, but there is potential confusion between get_product_specs (product lines) and get_drill_pipe_specs (drill pipe items), as well as between list_drill_pipe and search_drill_pipe. However, descriptions clarify these differences.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_, list_, search_, submit_), making it predictable for agents.
12 tools cover two main domains (FEODE company and drill string reference) without excess or deficiency, providing a well-scoped set.
The tool surface covers key operations for both domains: company info, product/service lifecycle, and drill string reference. Minor gaps like lack of company news or additional equipment categories, but core workflows are supported.