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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no word about result ordering, pagination, or matching behavior (e.g., partial vs exact matching), which would be the value-add the description should provide.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter read tool, though 'company pages' is slightly looser than needed.

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, read-only search tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the definition supplies the essential information an agent needs. It stops short of describing result behavior or how to interpret the limit default of 30, but little else is required.

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%, so both parameters (q and limit) are already documented in the schema, establishing the baseline of 3. The description does clarify that 'q' matches name, industry, or tagline, which is modest extra meaning beyond 'Keywords', but it says nothing about limit 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 names a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('company pages') and specifies what the query matches on: name, industry, or tagline. This distinguishes it from get_company (single lookup), though it doesn't explicitly name sibling search tools like search_profiles or search_jobs.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Search' and the input parameter q, but there is no guidance on when to use this versus get_company (direct lookup) or other search_* siblings, and no note about result limits or required permissions.

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