krs_get_company_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly lists the data returned (rejestrowe, siedzibę, zarząd, kapitał zakładowy, PKD, prokurentów, sprawozdania finansowe) and implies it provides the full current extract, revealing scope beyond simple retrieval.

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 3 lines, front-loads the main action, and lists key data elements efficiently. It is concise but covers essential aspects without waste.

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 one-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an output schema present, the description adequately covers what the tool returns. It does not explain error cases or prerequisites, but for this simple tool, completeness is high.

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 fully describes the parameter (krs_number with format example). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

The description clearly states 'Pobierz pełne dane spółki z KRS' (download full company data from KRS) and specifies the resource (based on KRS number), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'krs_search_company' which likely searches, not retrieves detailed data.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context signals indicate siblings: 'krs_search_company' likely for searching vs this for details. Usage is implied by the verb 'Pobierz' (download) but no exclusions or selection criteria are provided.

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