Get the public directory URL and what an introduction to a firm requires. READ-ONLY: returns instructions only — it does not submit a request or create a lead.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| firm_slug | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Explicitly declares READ-ONLY and no side effects, but does not disclose behavior for invalid firm_slug or additional constraints.
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, front-loaded sentences with no extraneous 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?
Covers purpose and safety, but omits return format or any details about the output; adequate for a simple tool 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?
Description provides no information about the firm_slug parameter, which has 0% schema description coverage.
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?
Clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'public directory URL and what an introduction requires', distinguishing it from siblings like get_firm which return firm 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?
Implies usage for retrieving introduction instructions, but does not explicitly compare to siblings or state when not to use this tool.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: get_firm retrieves a specific firm, get_introduction_path provides instructions for introductions, get_resource fetches a single resource, list_resources lists resources, and search_firms searches firms. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (get_firm, get_introduction_path, get_resource, list_resources, search_firms). No deviations.
Five tools is appropriate for a read-only directory server. Each tool covers a distinct operation, and the count is not excessive or insufficient.
The tool surface covers firm lookup/search, resource listing/retrieval, and introduction guidance. Missing a simple list all firms tool (only search is available), but this is a minor gap for a read-only directory.
