State business-entity registry lookup

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/open-world profile, and the description adds meaningful extras: which states list only active entities (NY/OR/PA) vs. include dissolved ones (CO/CT), and that source URLs are returned. Adds real value beyond the annotations, though it doesn't mention rate limits or pagination.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct load: search axes, coverage/active-state nuance, and return fields plus the sibling pointer. Front-loaded and no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (name, id, status, type, formation date, jurisdiction, addresses, registered agent, source URLs). Combined with coverage notes and the list_supported_states pointer, an agent has what it needs to call correctly.

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 already high (~83%), so baseline is 3. The description adds semantics on the active_only behavior by tying it to which states include dissolved entities, and clarifies the entity-name/state-id search axes beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (Secretary of State business-entity registries), scopes it to name and/or state entity id, and enumerates coverage. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like search_company by its official-registry framing.

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?

Says use for private companies, subsidiaries, LLCs, and legal-name verification, and routes the agent to list_supported_states for coverage. Clear when-to-use, though it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer search_company or get_company_profile over this.

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