find_entity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by warning that hits require country and status verification, implying name matches may not be unique or authoritative. However, it does not mention return shape, no-match behavior, or optional filter effects.

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 two short, purposeful sentences with no filler. The core search action is front-loaded, and the verification warning earns its place by giving agents actionable guidance.

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?

The tool is relatively simple and the description covers its primary purpose and the most important safety nuance. Still, without an output schema, annotations, or parameter details, the agent is left to infer what country and limit mean and what the response contains.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the name parameter is a legal name, but says nothing about the limit or country parameters, including defaults or filtering semantics. This is a significant gap for a tool with three parameters.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Search GLEIF by legal name.' This makes the tool's core purpose clear and distinguishes it from the sibling get_entity, which likely retrieves a specific known entity rather than searching by name.

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 instruction to 'Verify country and status on every hit' conveys a key usage caveat, but the description does not explicitly say when this tool should be preferred over related siblings like get_entity or entity_ownership. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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