get_entity_profile

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

The description correctly implies a read-only operation ('Get'), consistent with readOnlyHint=true. However, it adds no further behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide (e.g., no mention of rate limits, authentication, or return structure).

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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 tool with no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview of the return content (filing history, related entities, etc.). However, it could be improved by mentioning the output is a structured object, but this is not critical for a read-only tool.

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%, with clear descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., entity UUID, date filters). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('get') and resource ('entity profile'), and lists key components (filing history by agency, related entities, linked satellites, cross-references). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like 'get_entity_dossier' or 'get_bond_portfolio'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the 20+ sibling tools. There is no mention of alternative use cases or prerequisites.

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