search_nace_codes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the function and hierarchical filtering support; it does not mention result limits, pagination, ordering, or whether empty search text returns all codes. For a search tool, this lack of behavioral detail leaves an agent uncertain about what to expect from invocations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key capability (hierarchical filtering) without wasting the agent's attention.

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?

The description covers the main purpose and hierarchical filtering, but with no output schema, it does not disclose the structure of search results (e.g., whether results include code, name, hierarchy path). The includeNotes and includeHierarchy parameters hint at response content, but the description itself does not confirm what a typical result looks like or if results are truncated or paginated. This is a moderate gap for a search 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters, including level ranges, exact codes, parent codes, and defaults for boolean flags. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Search' with a clear resource 'NACE industry codes' and includes differentiators like 'hierarchical filtering support' and 'full SN2025 classification'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as search_companies, which search companies, and get_municipalities, which retrieve municipal data. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool: when searching for NACE industry codes, especially with hierarchical filtering needs. Although it does not explicitly name alternatives, the sibling list contains no other NACE code search tool, so the context is clear. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the distinct resource type makes the intended usage obvious.

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