ares_lookup_company

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'look up' implies a read-only operation, and the description clarifies that it returns aggregated data from multiple registries. However, it does not disclose potential error behaviors, rate limits, or any contingencies if a registry is unavailable, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the core action and resource. It lists the returned data categories without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to scan and parse.

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 simple parameter set and lack of output schema, the description adequately conveys the tool's purpose and the type of data returned. It does not specify output formatting or error cases, but for a lookup tool with one parameter, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke it.

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?

The schema already provides high coverage (100%) for the sole parameter, including normalization and Mod-11 checking. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating that the lookup is by IČO, which is already explicit in the schema and tool name. Thus it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Look up') and a clear resource ('a Czech company by IČO'). It explicitly lists the types of data returned, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ares_check_vat_payer or ares_get_trade_licenses that focus on narrower aspects.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It states what the tool does but lacks any 'use this when' or 'for X use Y' direction, and does not mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the IČO parameter.

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