p0010073_query_trademark_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the query method (by enterprise name or document number) but omits details such as pagination (page_no, page_size), the role of tm_reg_no and extra_params, any required permissions, or the structure of the response. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 and to the point, but it lacks structure (e.g., no separation of purpose from parameters). It front-loads the core action but omits important details. While concise, it could be more informative without adding length.

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 the tool has 5 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and an output schema (unknown content), the description is insufficient. It covers only the basic search criterion but fails to explain pagination, optional filters, or the nature of the returned data.

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 has 5 parameters with zero description coverage. The description only mentions the required 'ent_info' parameter (enterprise name or document number), ignoring the purpose of page_no, page_size, tm_reg_no, and extra_params. An agent cannot infer their semantics without additional information.

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 queries trademark information by enterprise name or document number, distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on patents, copyrights, or business profiles. However, it could be more specific about the output (e.g., returning a list of trademarks) to enhance clarity.

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 purpose implies it is for trademark queries, and sibling tools cover other IP types (e.g., patent, copyright), so usage context is somewhat clear. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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