Eutm Get

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a complete extract and includes the class-wise Waren-/Dienstleistungsverzeichnis, but it does not address error behavior, authorization, or side effects. The read-only nature is inferable from 'Get' and 'Registerauszug' but not explicit.

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 two short sentences, front-loads the core purpose ('Vollständiger Registerauszug ... nach Anmeldenummer'), and every clause adds information. No redundant filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it defines the input and the key content of the result. It only lacks explicit routing to or away from sibling tools and error-case behavior, which are minor for the core call.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates for the single parameter by explaining that 'nummer' is the application number and giving concrete examples ('018945321 oder W01234567'). This removes ambiguity about format and accepted input.

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 that the tool returns the complete register extract ('Vollständiger Registerauszug') for an EU trade mark or IR with EU designation, identified by application number. It also adds the distinguishing detail that it contains the goods/services list per class, which separates it from sibling status and search tools.

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 use case is implied: pass an application number when you need a full EU trade mark extract with class-wise goods/services. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over marken_status, tmview_get, or eutm_search, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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