Search companies in Swiss Central Business Name Index (zefix.ch)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, authorization requirements, or side effects. It only describes the output format, leaving behavioral aspects largely unspecified.

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 that efficiently captures the output contents. It is front-loaded with the key deliverable (semi-structured markdown) and then lists fields. While compact, it could be slightly more structured for readability.

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 tool has 9 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a good overview of the return fields but lacks details on search behavior (e.g., exact vs. fuzzy matching, pagination, or error conditions). The parameter descriptions in the schema partially compensate, but overall completeness is adequate but not robust.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 9 parameters, and the description adds no additional parameter-level context. According to guidelines, when schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3. The description does not compensate by clarifying parameter interactions or usage patterns.

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 that the tool returns semi-structured markdown text with detailed company information from the Swiss Central Business Name Index. It enumerates specific fields such as legal names, address, business identifiers, and history of changes, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where it might be inappropriate. Since no sibling tools are listed, the lack of usage context is a significant gap.

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