regdata_polish_regon

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses no API key required, anonymous scraping, separate rows for local units, and billing cap via maxItems. However, lacks details on rate limits, data freshness, or potential blocks, which are relevant for a scraper.

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 a single dense paragraph but efficiently front-loads purpose and key features. Every sentence adds value. Could be slightly better structured (e.g., bullet points) but is concise enough for its length.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return values. Mentions results include company data and local units as separate rows, and references billing. But lacks detail on output structure, pagination, or field names. References regdata_describe for fields, which partially compensates.

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?

Only one parameter (maxItems) with schema coverage 100%. Description adds context that input is freeform and matches Apify schema, but defers exact field details to regdata_describe. This is adequate but does not enrich beyond schema's own description.

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 scrapes Poland's REGON (GUS) registry, listing specific lookup methods (NIP/REGON/KRS, address+PKD, local units). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the target registry and geographic focus.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: call regdata_describe with slug 'polish-regon-scraper' first if unsure of fields. Lists input types (name, tax ID, registration number). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with siblings, but general usage is clear.

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