get_entity_dossier

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with a read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns 'counts plus recent samples' and explains how parameters affect the rollup. No contradictions.

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 compact (3 sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No fluff.

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's complexity (dossier from multiple sources) and no output schema, the description informs that results include 'counts plus recent samples'. It covers key parameters well. A brief note on the general output structure would improve completeness but not critical.

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% (all parameters described). The description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that include_family 'rolls the totals up across the entity's corporate family', clarifies family_confidence strictness levels with examples, and describes include_subsidiaries as rolling up direct subsidiaries from SEC data.

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 uses a specific verb phrase 'Get a cross-source dossier for an entity (by UUID)' and lists concrete data types (regulatory filings, SEC signals, sanctions screening, asset footprint). It clearly distinguishes from siblings which are mostly search tools or single-source tools.

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 explains when to use the key parameters (include_family, include_subsidiaries) and states the tool provides 'the most complete single view'. It implies use for a comprehensive overview but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state 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.