compliance_fetch_finra_broker

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

Descriptively states 'Read-only. No side effects. Idempotent. US only.' Adds caching ('24-hour cache') and source verification ('Verified source: FINRA BrokerCheck'), going beyond annotations. 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?

Every sentence adds value: purpose, properties, usage guidance, alternatives, error handling. Well-organized and front-loaded with essential info.

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 single parameter, rich annotations, and output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, return data (registration status, qualifications, etc.), caching, and fallback instructions.

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?

Describes crd_number as 'Central Registration Depository number as a string of digits e.g. 1234567. Required.', adding format clarity and limitation ('name lookup not supported') beyond the schema's description.

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?

Specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'FINRA BrokerCheck registration' by CRD number clearly states the action. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool 'compliance_search_npi_by_name' for healthcare providers, and mentions US-only scope.

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 states when to use: 'when you have the CRD number'. Provides alternative 'Use compliance_search_npi_by_name instead for healthcare providers'. Also gives post-use error handling instruction for report_feedback.

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