hent_foretak

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what 'detailed information' includes, whether the operation is read-only, how errors are handled, or what the response format looks like. For a retrieval tool, these omissions are significant.

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?

A single, concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Hent') and resource ('detaljert informasjon om et norsk foretak'). Every word earns its place with no redundant content.

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 simple single-parameter lookup tool, the description establishes the core purpose but lacks information about the output structure or edge cases. The absence of an output schema makes the lack of return-value explanation more noticeable, though the sibling tool names provide some context.

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?

The input schema already provides complete documentation for the single parameter (9-sifret organisasjonsnummer with an example). The description merely reiterates that the tool uses the organization number, adding no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Hent' (fetch) and identifies the resource 'norsk foretak' (Norwegian enterprise) with the lookup basis 'organisasjonsnummer'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'sok_foretak' (search) by indicating direct retrieval.

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 implies usage when an organization number is available ('basert på organisasjonsnummer'), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives, exclusions, or when to prefer this over the search tool 'sok_foretak'. No direct comparison is provided.

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