search_iapd_individuals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the purpose and offers no information about pagination, filtering behavior, authentication requirements, return format, or other notable behaviors.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. There is no redundant or filler 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?

With 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this one-sentence description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain pagination, filter combinations, result structure, or any operational details needed for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is only 31% (4 of 13 parameters have descriptions), and the tool description adds no parameter-level meaning. It fails to explain the numerous undocumented parameters like bc_scope, ia_scope, cal_date_from, or firm_count_min, leaving the agent without guidance.

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 specifies a clear action ('Search') and a specific resource ('IAPD/BrokerCheck individual investment-adviser representatives and brokers'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like search_broker_dealers or search_advisers by focusing on individual representatives and brokers.

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 the tool is for finding individual investment-adviser representatives and brokers, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. Context is clear but not fully articulated.

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