Investment Adviser Profile (Form ADV)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, so safety is covered. The description goes beyond them by warning that exempt reporting advisers do not report Item 5 figures (RAUM, employee count, fee structure), which prevents the agent from treating a missing field as an error. It doesn't describe behavior for an invalid or unknown CRD.

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 field list is front-loaded immediately after the resource, and the exempt-adviser caveat and the sibling pointer follow logically. The enumeration of returned fields is long but each element earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 no output schema, the description fully enumerates what the call returns and flags the one case where fields will be absent. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly or interpret a sparse response is missing.

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 100% and the schema already states 'Organization CRD number' with an example, so the schema carries the parameter explanation. The description reinforces that it is the Organization CRD (not an individual CRD) but adds little syntax or format detail beyond that. 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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Form ADV profile') and enumerates the exact contents returned: names, CRD, SEC file number, office, website, RAUM breakdown, employee count, fee structure. It also explicitly scopes which entities are covered (SEC-registered or exempt reporting advisers), which separates it from SearchInvestmentAdvisers.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to use SearchInvestmentAdvisers to find the CRD number, giving a clear prerequisite and alternative path. It doesn't state when-not-to-use beyond that, but the lookup-then-fetch workflow is fully implied.

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