companies_house_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that a COMPANIES_HOUSE_API_KEY is required, which is genuine operational context, but says nothing about rate limits, result format, pagination, or what the search matches against.

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?

One compact sentence with the resource and prerequisite front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than pure economy.

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?

For a tool with an undocumented required parameter, no output schema, no annotations, and a near-identical sibling, the description omits too much: query semantics, expected output, and when to prefer this over companies_house_company. Coverage across all structured fields is effectively absent.

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 single 'query' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description is the only place semantics could be documented - yet it says nothing about whether query accepts a company name, number, keyword, or partial string. The schema/description gap is left unfilled.

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 verb and resource: 'Search UK Companies House.' An agent understands the domain, but it does not differentiate from the sibling companies_house_company (which presumably looks up a specific company by number), leaving the search-vs-lookup choice implicit.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus companies_house_company, sec_edgar_company, or other search siblings. The only contextual note is an API-key prerequisite, which is configuration, not usage direction.

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