ares_lookup_cz_nace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It specifies the query semantics (code or partial name) and implies read-only lookup, but it does not reveal result structure, match behavior, pagination, or any edge cases. Basic but minimal 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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to understanding purpose and usage.

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?

This is a simple lookup tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description conveys purpose and usage context, but since there is no output schema, a slightly richer note about the expected return shape (e.g., list of matching NACE entries) would make it fully complete. Overall it is nearly complete for its simplicity.

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%, with both query and limit documented in detail including examples. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Look up' and clearly identifies the resource 'CZ-NACE (Czech industry classification) entries' with scope 'by code or partial name'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning its role in filtering ares_search_companies by industry.

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?

Provides clear usage context: 'Useful when filtering ares_search_companies by industry', naming the related sibling tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with ares_get_res_classification, but the guidance is unambiguous enough for an agent.

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