ch_register_publications

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behaviors: results are newest first, the date window is capped at 31 days, details=true costs one extra request per row with a 25-row cap, and larger windows require pagination. This gives an agent a realistic model of cost and behavior.

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?

Three dense sentences cover the core purpose, parameter variations, and pagination behavior without wasted words. The key function is front-loaded and every sentence adds operational value.

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?

Given the read-only nature, 100% schema coverage, and absent output schema, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It tells the agent what the basic rows return, what details adds, how to paginate, and what limits apply.

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 schema already describes all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating the 31-day window limit, newest-first ordering, the 25-row ceiling for details, and the per-row request cost for details=true.

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 identifies the tool's action and resource: retrieving new commercial register entries for one canton over a date window from the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce. It also distinguishes this publication-feed tool from the sibling company-level tools by framing it around gazette entries, dates, and cantons.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: for new commercial register entries in a canton over a date window. It also explains how to use type for mutations/deletions, details for richer rows, and page for pagination, but it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or compare against sibling tools.

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