get_company_profile_by_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. 'Find ... and return' clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation, and the word 'Exact' communicates strict matching rather than fuzzy search. It does not discuss rate limits or error behavior, but for a simple lookup tool the behavior is adequately disclosed.

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 compact, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and contains no filler. The Args section adds necessary parameter semantics without redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return value structure is already documented. The single parameter is fully described, and the read-only nature is implied. The only notable omission is guidance on when to prefer sibling tools like search_company for less exact queries, but this is not critical for basic invocation.

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 provides only a bare string property named 'query' with no description, so all semantic weight falls on the description. The description compensates fully by enumerating the three valid query forms: exact company name, six-digit stock code, or eight-digit DART corporation code.

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-resource pairing: 'Find a listed company and return its DART company profile.' It clearly states what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tools search_company or get_company_profile.

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 tells the agent what inputs are accepted ('Exact company name, six-digit stock code, or eight-digit DART corporation code'), which implies the tool is best used when an exact identifier is known. However, it does not name alternatives such as search_company for fuzzy or partial matches, so usage guidance relative to siblings is only implicit.

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