nc_get_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and identifier, with no information about response format, error handling, authorization requirements, or other side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that returns 'detailed information'.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundancy. The purpose and identifier are front-loaded, making it immediately parseable.

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, no annotations, and a tool that promises 'detailed information', the description provides minimal guidance on what the response will contain or how to handle edge cases (e.g., invalid or missing RIDET). It is one of many similar get/stat tools among siblings, and the description does not sufficiently differentiate or elaborate.

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 100%, and the schema already documents the ridet parameter with a pattern and explanation. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema's own parameter description, so it does not enhance semantic understanding.

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 a clear verb ('get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific company') and identifies the unique identifier (RIDET number). It distinguishes from siblings that search or aggregate, though 'detailed information' is somewhat vague about what fields are included.

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 phrase 'using its RIDET number' implies this tool is for when you already have the RIDET identifier, contrasting with search tools like nc_search_companies. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention any alternatives, leaving some inference to the agent.

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