enterprise_get_enterprise_base_info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. As a query tool, it likely is read-only, but this is not stated.

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 efficiently conveys purpose and parameter options. However, the parameter list is somewhat raw and could be better integrated into the overall narrative.

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's simple schema (2 params, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description adequately explains parameter usage but lacks broader context such as return values, error handling, or example usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by listing concrete values for matchKeyword (企业名称/注册号/统一社会信用代码/企业id) and keywordType (name/nameId/regNumber/socialCreditCode). However, it omits the relationship between the parameters and default behavior, reducing completeness.

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 states it queries basic enterprise business information ("查询企业基础工商信息"), which is a clear verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like enterprise_get_enterprise_profile or enterprise_get_enterprise_business_info, leaving ambiguity about what 'basic' entails.

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. It simply lists parameters without contextual usage advice or conditional logic, forcing the agent to infer from the name alone.

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