search_by_nip

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden; it discloses return fields (name, REGON, address, entity type) and relationship to get_full_report. Does not mention error handling or input formatting edge cases, but for a simple lookup this is adequate.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded action and clear structure: first sentence states what is looked up and input format, second states output and suggested next step. No filler or repetition.

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, but description lists returned fields and points to get_full_report for richer data. With only one parameter and clear purpose, it is adequate, though it omits not-found behavior or NIP formatting variations.

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?

Input schema has no description for the single nip parameter (0% coverage); description adds essential meaning by specifying it is a 10-digit tax id and clarifies how the returned REGON is used. This meaningfully compensates for the schema gap.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Look up' and identifies resource 'Polish business entity by NIP', explicitly distinguishing from sibling search_by_regon/search_by_krs by identifier and from get_full_report by noting basic vs. detailed data.

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?

Clear context: use when you have a NIP and need basic registry data, with explicit follow-up to get_full_report for the detailed record. Does not explicitly rule out sibling search tools, but the identifier-specific scope is unambiguous.

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