get_hk_company

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it does not state that this is a read-only lookup, how ambiguous or partial name fragments are resolved, whether multiple matches are returned, or what happens on a miss. Only the input facet ('5-digit ticker or name fragment') is disclosed.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resolution key is stated immediately and nothing is padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and with one simple parameter the definition is minimally adequate. It nonetheless omits any routing context for the surrounding HK toolset, leaving the agent to guess where this fits in a workflow.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the single parameter is already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description's '5-digit' qualifier adds minor specificity beyond the schema's '00700' example but nothing about format tolerance or matching semantics.

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 gives a specific verb ('Resolve'), resource ('HK stock company'), and the two accepted key forms, which sets it apart from the geographically-named siblings get_sse_company, get_szse_company, and get_bse_company. It does not, however, clarify its relationship to the other HK tools like get_hk_financials or get_hk_section.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement that this is the entry point for resolving a company before calling get_hk_filings or get_hk_financials, and no exclusion of alternatives. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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