suggest_company_kz

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the search capability but does not reveal whether results are partial matches, pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or any potential destructive side effects. Minimal 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 sentence of 11 words, front-loaded with the verb 'Search' and the resource. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 simple two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on return format, error handling, or any Kazakhstan-specific business ID validation rules, leaving gaps for an agent to infer behavior.

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 50%; the query parameter has a description in the schema, and the description reiterates its purpose. The count parameter has no schema description, and the tool description adds no extra meaning for it. The description does not compensate for the missing count semantics.

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 it searches Kazakh companies and entrepreneurs by name or BIN, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from generic siblings like 'suggest_company' by specifying Kazakhstan, but does not explicitly differentiate from 'suggest_company_by' which may be similar.

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 implies usage for searching Kazakh companies by name or BIN, but offers no guidance on when not to use it or mention alternative tools like 'suggest_company_by'. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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