enterprise_get_enterprise_business_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose and parameter types, lacking details on mutability, auth needs, rate limits, or output characteristics. For a query tool, basic read-only behavior could be implied but not explicit.

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 brief, starting with a clear purpose sentence followed by parameter descriptions. No wasted words; each sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return values or behavior. It adequately covers parameters but omits output format, pagination, or error scenarios, which an agent needs to invoke correctly among 22 sibling tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by listing accepted values for matchKeyword (enterprise name/registration number/credit code/ID) and keywordType options ('name', 'nameId', 'regNumber', 'socialCreditCode'). This compensates well for the bare schema.

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 enterprise business-related information to identify main business and industry chain capabilities. The verb '查询' (query) and resource '企业业务相关信息' are specific, and the tool is well-differentiated from siblings like enterprise_get_enterprise_base_info which focus on base info.

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 usage for identifying main business and chain capabilities but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, nor does it reference alternatives among the many sibling tools. Some implied context exists but no exclusions.

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