get_registered_office_address

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

The description implies a read-only operation via the verb 'Get', but no behavioral traits are disclosed (e.g., authentication requirements, rate limits, idempotency). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and fails to add meaningful transparency.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, earning its place without filler.

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 (not shown), the description need not explain return values. However, the lack of annotations and usage guidance means the tool is incomplete for an agent to decide when to invoke it reliably. It is minimally adequate for a simple getter but lacks contextual cues.

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%, and the description does not explain the company_number parameter. It adds no meaning beyond the schema's type and required status, leaving the agent to infer the parameter's role without guidance.

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 verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'a company's registered office address', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company_profile that may return more comprehensive data. However, it does not specify the scope or any filtering criteria, leaving some ambiguity.

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, such as get_company_profile or list_uk_establishments. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context for usage.

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