Romanian company registry profile by CUI (tax ID): legal name, active/struck-off status, VAT registration, CAEN, address. ~2M companies. 10 credits (charged only if found).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cui | Yes | CUI digits, e.g. 1590082 | |
| api_key | Yes | Your DACIX API key (dacix_sk_...). Get one with store_register. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions credits and charging condition, but does not state if the operation is read-only, auth requirements beyond api_key, or behavior on not found.
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?
Single sentence conveys purpose, fields, coverage, and cost. Front-loaded with key info. Slightly lacking in structure for complex details but adequate for its length.
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 lookup tool with only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core functionality, return fields, and cost. Lacks error behavior details but is reasonably 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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond 'by CUI (tax ID)' which is already in schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves a Romanian company registry profile by CUI, listing specific fields like legal name, status, VAT, CAEN, address. It specifies the resource and action but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like ro_company_search.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use ro_company_search vs this lookup). No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.