nordic-registry-mcp-server

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, open-world, idempotent operation. The description adds valuable context by specifying the search is by name and listing filter options, which enhances understanding beyond the annotations. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and filter details in a single, efficient sentence. Every element serves a clear purpose without redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters), low schema coverage, and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, and key parameters, and the output schema handles return values, so no additional explanation is needed.

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 low at 13%, with only the 'query' parameter documented. The description mentions filter parameters like 'org_form', 'municipality', etc., but doesn't provide detailed semantics or examples. It adds some meaning but doesn't fully compensate for the schema gaps, aligning with the baseline for partial 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 clearly states the specific action ('Search Norwegian companies by name') and resource ('Norwegian companies'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'norway_get_company' which requires an org number. It explicitly differentiates from that sibling, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives: 'If you have a 9-digit org number, use norway_get_company instead.' It also lists available filters, helping users understand the tool's scope and when it's appropriate.

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