new_business_filings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does add useful context: the data is pulled from official state sources, limited to 10 states, and filtered by a date window, implying a read-only retrieval. However, it does not describe return shape, pagination, or data freshness caveats beyond what the schema already hints at.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler: the scope is front-loaded, then the use case follows. Every clause contributes.

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 definition is complete enough to select and invoke the tool given full schema param docs and zero required params. The main gap is the absence of an output schema and any statement about what the returned filings contain, which would improve invocation confidence.

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 schema covers all four parameters with descriptions, examples, and constraints (coverage is 100%), so the description adds little param-specific value. Its mention of 'windowed by date' is redundant with the daysBack/sinceDate 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?

States a specific action ('Pull'), a defined resource ('newly registered U.S. businesses'), and concrete scope ('official state sources (10 states)' + date window). The recency and source make it easy to distinguish from siblings like business_search or federal_awards.

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?

Gives explicit intended use cases: sales-lead feeds and monitoring brand-new companies. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to an alternative tool, so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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