regdata_italy_registro_imprese

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It mentions 'No official API - structured JSON' and 'free-tier', hinting at scraper nature and potential limitations, but it lacks disclosure of error handling, rate limits, or data freshness. More behavioral context would be needed for a tool with zero annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the tool's core function and extracted data types. Every phrase adds value: purpose, data types, source, input format, and fallback guidance. No redundant words.

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?

Given the tool has 1 parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides adequate context: scraping nature, free-tier limitation, and a referral to regdata_describe for field details. However, it does not describe the output structure or confirm success/failure indicators.

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% for the declared parameter (maxItems), but the schema also allows additionalProperties. The description adds crucial meaning by specifying that input should include fields like name, tax ID, or registration number—something not evident from the schema alone. This compensates for the schema's genericity.

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 it searches Italy's Registro Imprese by company name and extracts specific free-tier data fields (name, PEC, legal form, ATECO). It distinguishes from 30+ sibling tools by specifying Italy-specific scope and free-tier extraction.

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 tells the agent to pass a flat object with name/tax ID/registration number and suggests calling regdata_describe with slug first if unsure. It provides explicit guidance on input preparation but does not explicitly compare to near-siblings like regdata_italy_pec or state when not to use this tool.

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