autocomplete

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it returns name suggestions with LEI and legal name, and mentions automatic fallback to fuzzy search if autocomplete endpoint is unavailable.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidelines, then fallback behavior. No redundancy, every sentence adds unique information.

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?

Despite no output schema, description covers purpose, usage, failure conditions, fallback, and return content (name suggestions with LEI and legal name). Complete for a read-only autocomplete tool with 2 params.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It reaffirms the minLength=2 constraint for prefix but does not introduce new semantic details.

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?

Clearly states the tool's purpose: get entity name suggestions from a prefix (min 2 characters). Distinguishes from sibling search_entity by emphasizing quick suggestions vs full search with pagination.

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?

Explicitly provides USE WHEN examples (e.g., 'suggest companies starting with X') and when to use search_entity instead. Also states failure condition (prefix < 2 chars).

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