regdata_msig

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

No annotations provided, yet description omits critical behavioral traits such as authentication, rate limits, pagination, or error handling. Only mentions fetchDetails slows down but returns complete content. Significant gaps for a parameter-heavy tool.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Could be slightly more structured, but no fluff. The reference to regdata_describe is appropriate but adds a minor complexity.

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?

Lacks explanation of output structure (JSON format unspecified) and how date range works. No details on search type differences. With 12 parameters and no output schema, more context would help agent select correctly.

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%, so baseline holds. Description adds little beyond schema: mentions full-text search character limits and partial matching, but already present. The note about accepting advanced fields via regdata_describe is helpful but minor.

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?

Clearly states it searches Polish Court & Economic Gazette for bankruptcy, liquidation, restructuring, and creditor calls. Distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'Poland MSiG' and referencing archive from 2001.

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?

Implies usage for Polish economic/legal announcements but lacks explicit when-to-use or comparisons with related tools like regdata_czech_isir_insolvency. No guidance on when not to use.

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