Paid reports and x402 payments are temporarily suspended pending commercial-readiness review. Free previews remain available. Do not sign or send a payment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of most-recent events to return. | |
| language | No | en | |
| lookback_days | No | Return events recorded during this many recent days. | |
| company_number | Yes | Exact nine-digit Israeli company registration number. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds valuable operational context beyond the annotations: the paid service is temporarily suspended, free previews remain available, and the agent is instructed not to sign or send payment. This is useful behavioral guidance.
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 extremely concise, with no wasted words. It front-loads the most critical operational status and closes with a clear prohibition, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 omits the tool's actual purpose and return behavior, and there is no output schema to fill that gap. While the suspension notice is important, an agent cannot understand what this tool does or what invoking it would return.
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?
The description adds no parameter-level meaning. Schema coverage is 75%, so most parameters are documented in the schema, but the description does not compensate for the undocumented 'language' parameter or otherwise clarify parameter usage.
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 never states what the tool does. There is no verb or resource indicating that this tool retrieves Israeli company changes. It only describes a temporary suspension of paid reports and payments, leaving the core function to be inferred from the tool name alone.
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 implies that this paid tool should not be used during the suspension and that free previews are an alternative. However, it does not explicitly name a specific sibling tool or state the conditions under which this tool should be used once available.
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.