swiss_ip_search_trademarks_by_class

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, making it a safe search. The description adds return format details (source, total, count, results, next_page_token) and mentions pagination, but does not cover any additional behavioral traits like rate limits or required permissions.

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 front-loaded with the main action and use case, followed by a concise parameter list. It avoids unnecessary repetition, though the args list somewhat duplicates schema content.

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 output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it still mentions the return format. It covers pagination, the required nice_class, and optional filters. Missing example values or error handling, but overall complete for a search tool.

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?

Though schema descriptions exist for nice_class and query, page_size and page_token lack descriptions. The description lists all parameters and explains nice_class range, query as optional text filter, page_size results per page, and page_token for pagination, adding value beyond the 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 states 'Durchsucht Schweizer Marken nach Nizza-Klassifikation' (searches Swiss trademarks by Nice classification) and provides a specific use case 'Branchenanalyse: Marken einer Nizza-Klasse (1-45) finden.' This clearly differentiates from siblings like swiss_ip_search_trademarks and swiss_ip_search_trademarks_by_owner.

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 use case tag indicates when to use (industry analysis by class). While it does not explicitly state when not to use, the scope is clear and sibling tools are listed, providing alternatives.

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