Search Companies

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description adds behavioral context: returns a paginated list, revenue filtering excludes companies with no reported NOK revenue, the data source is BRREG, and each hit includes a canonical URL and matched fields. It does not contradict annotations, but could mention max limit or pagination cursor semantics, though these are covered in the schema.

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 five sentences with zero fluff. It front-loads the core purpose, then gives usage guidance, a critical caveat, data source, and return value summary—all in a compact, well-ordered structure.

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?

For a 13-parameter search tool with a rich input schema and an output schema present, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when to use it vs alternatives, pagination, data source, and the key behavioral exclusion. No significant gaps remain.

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?

With 77% schema coverage, the schema already documents parameters richly (e.g., NACE prefix rules, fylke/kommune digit formats). The description adds value by explaining the non-obvious revenue exclusion rule ('see min_omsetning_nok') and by summarizing filter categories that map to the parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Search Norwegian companies with filters' listing specific filter categories (name, NACE, location, status, employees, revenue, founding date), and differentiates from the sibling get_company by advising to use it once a specific orgnr is known.

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?

Includes explicit usage guidance: 'Use when you have a description and need to find matching companies; use get_company once you have a specific orgnr.' Also mentions the revenue filter exclusion behavior and points to the relevant parameter for details.

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