Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the upstream data source (SEC Form ADV) and what the single-firm response contains (AUM, private funds, disclosures), but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, error behavior, or what a search result set looks like.

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?

A single dense sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is slightly run-on with the colon-plus-or construction, but every clause carries information about the data source or its capabilities.

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 two-param read tool with no output schema this covers the essentials – source and partial return shape – but leaves the search-mode output, pagination, and zero-argument behavior undefined, which matters given all parameters are optional.

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% and both params ('crd' = CRD number, 'query' = firm name) are documented, so the baseline is 3. The description nominally adds lookup modes, but it also advertises 'SEC number' as a search key that does not exist in the schema – a small risk of steering the agent toward a nonexistent parameter.

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?

States a specific resource (investment adviser firms from SEC Form ADV) and two concrete modes: search by name/CRD or fetch a single firm by CRD with AUM, private funds and disclosures. The resource is clearly distinct from siblings like auditor or enforcement, though the description never explicitly contrasts them.

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 two operating modes are implied by 'search by ... or get one by CRD', and the mention of AUM/private funds/disclosures hints that the single-firm lookup is the richer path. However, it never says which mode to pick, what happens with zero arguments, or when another tool would be preferable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.