regdata_italy_pec

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

The description notes 'No official API', implying unofficial data source, and mentions billing caps via maxItems. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or response format. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides only partial transparency.

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?

Five sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, function, use cases, data source note, input instructions. No redundancy, and key info is front-loaded.

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 description adequately covers what the tool does and how to provide input. Without an output schema, it briefly hints at outputs (PEC email, SDI code) but lacks format or error details. For a simple lookup tool, this is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 describes only maxItems parameter at 100% coverage, but the description adds essential context: the input is a freeform flat object with search keys like name, tax ID, etc. It also directs users to regdata_describe for exact fields, compensating for schema sparseness.

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 resolves Italian company PEC email and SDI code from VAT, CF, or name. It specifies the resource, verb, and country, distinguishing it from sibling tools that cover other 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?

The description mentions use cases (fatturazione elettronica, KYC, bulk enrichment) and advises calling regdata_describe for field details. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives.

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