p0010068_fuzzy_search_company_name

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a fuzzy search is performed, but does not mention result limits, ranking criteria, or any side effects. An output schema exists, but behavior is not explained.

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 short (two sentences) and to the point, with no extraneous words. It could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 4 parameters and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain optional parameters, result format, or any constraints. The tool is relatively simple, so a minimal description is expected, but gaps remain.

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 coverage is 0% and description only mentions the '企业名称关键字' (ent_name), ignoring type, region_id, and extra_params. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names themselves.

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 the tool performs a fuzzy search of company names by keyword, distinguishing it from sibling tools that query specific business data (trademarks, patents, etc.). The phrase '简版' hints at a simplified version, but no full version is listed.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or what the optional parameters (type, region_id, extra_params) are for. The description only implies usage for keyword-based fuzzy matching.

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