get_company_profileFetch a single Romanian company by CUI (accepts an 'RO' prefix): identity, address, CAEN activities, latest public financials, and data-source freshness. Does not return contact details.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cui | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive. Description adds that it does not return contact details and mentions data-source freshness, providing extra behavioral context beyond 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?
Two clear sentences with no extraneous information. Front-loaded with main action and input format.
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 fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, description covers return data fields, limitations (no contact details), and data freshness. Meets completeness needs.
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 0%, but the description adds essential semantic info for the only parameter 'cui' by noting it accepts an 'RO' prefix, which is not in 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?
Description clearly states verb 'Fetch', resource 'Romanian company', input 'CUI', and lists returned data fields. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting what is not returned (contact details).
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?
Description implies usage context but does not specify when not to use or provide comparisons to sibling tools beyond the list. No explicit exclusions or alternatives.
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.
Each tool addresses a distinct aspect: financial history, profile, status, CAEN code lookup, and search. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case, e.g., get_company_financials, search_companies.
5 tools are well-scoped for a company data server, covering core operations without excess.
Covers key company data aspects: profile, financials, status, CAEN lookup, and search. Minor gap: no tool for contact details or historical status changes, but core is present.