pt_comp_search_mergers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the tool returns merger cases and names the fields included, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not mention any additional behaviors such as query semantics, ordering, or potential limitations like pagination.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the main action and resource, then adds relevant return information. It contains zero wasted words and is highly concise.

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 tool is relatively simple with four parameters fully described in the schema. The description provides enough context about the tool's purpose and return value, though it does not explain how the search works or how it relates to sibling tools. Overall it is adequate for a basic search tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already fully documented in structured data. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('AdC merger control decisions'), and clarifies the scope ('concentracoes de empresas'). It also lists the key return fields (acquiring party, target, sector, outcome), which distinguishes it from the sibling search tool pt_comp_search_decisions.

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 clearly indicates that this tool is for searching merger control decisions, which gives a clear context for use. It does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over pt_comp_search_decisions, but the specialized focus on mergers makes the intended usage obvious.

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