regdata_ekw_ksiegi_wieczyste

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

Given no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: authentication (keyless), cost model (pay per result), free plan allowance, and auto-calculation of check digit in kwNumbers. Does not disclose error handling for invalid entries or response format details.

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?

Description is reasonably concise and front-loaded with core purpose. Includes necessary details like parameter clarifications and plan limits, though some information (e.g., free plan note) is placed inside the kwNumbers description rather than in a separate section.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and some usage context. However, without an output schema, the description does not explain return values or output structure. Missing details on error handling or what happens on invalid inputs, which are important for a scraping 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond schema descriptions: explains kwNumber format with auto-calc, describes viewType enum meanings, default sections, and maxConcurrency behavior. Provides context missing from schema (e.g., free plan limit).

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 as a scraper for Poland's Electronic Land Registry (EKW), specifying the extracted data types (ownership, mortgages, restrictions, property details) and the context (property due diligence, credit-risk checks). It differentiates from numerous sibling tools focused on other countries or registries.

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?

States the tool is keyless and for property due diligence/credit-risk checks, with pay-per-result pricing. Mentions free plan limits and upgrade for unlimited batches. Hints at an alternative for advanced fields (regdata_describe) but does not explicitly compare with other siblings or provide when-not-to-use scenarios.

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