get_psc_corporate_entity

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only implies a read operation ('Get'). It does not disclose any behavioral details such as data freshness, permissions, or side effects, leaving the agent without sufficient transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is concise but could benefit from slight expansion for context.

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 large set of sibling tools with subtle distinctions, the description is too minimal. It lacks differentiation from other corporate PSC tools and does not explain what a 'corporate entity with significant control' entails or when it is appropriate.

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% with descriptions for both 'psc_id' and 'company_number'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high 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 'Get corporate entity with significant control' clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes from individual PSC tools like 'get_psc_individual' but does not differentiate from other corporate PSC siblings such as 'get_psc_corporate_entity_beneficial_owner'.

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 alternatives like 'get_psc_corporate_entity_beneficial_owner'. The description provides no context for selection among the many PSC-related sibling tools.

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