search_ateco

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Discloses fuzzy search behavior and result limit (up to 20 matches). No mention of side effects or authentication, but acceptable for a read-only search tool.

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?

Single sentence, 17 words, includes all key elements: action (fuzzy search), target (ATECO 2007), input (name fragment), examples, and output limit. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers essential aspects for a simple search tool: what it searches, how it searches (fuzzy, by fragment), and result cap. No output schema exists, so missing details about result structure; but overall adequate.

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 for the single parameter 'query' is 100%. Description repeats the parameter's purpose ('name fragment') but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema's description.

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?

Clearly states 'Fuzzy search ATECO 2007 sectors by name fragment', specifying the target resource (ATECO 2007 sectors) and the action (fuzzy search). Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_ateco' which presumably retrieves by exact code.

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?

Provides examples ('costruzioni', 'ristorazione') and mentions result limit (up to 20 matches). Implicitly contrasts with siblings, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives.

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