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 fully covered. The description adds only that the profile is 'public' (no private/authenticated data), which is modest value, and says nothing about rate limits or failure modes.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the id-format clarification in parentheses. No filler or 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?

With an output schema present, a fully documented single parameter, and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete for this simple lookup. Only minor gap is the absence of explicit routing guidance against the sibling search tools.

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% and the schema only says 'Public company id.', but the description adds real meaning: the id may be a raw id or the 'company:<id>' form returned by search/fetch. That accepted-input detail is not derivable from the schema and genuinely helps invocation.

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 verb (Fetch) and resource (one public WeJob company profile) with clear scope ('one public'). The resource noun 'company' implicitly separates it from siblings like wejob_get_job and wejob_get_formation, but it never explicitly delineates itself from wejob_search_companies.

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: fetch a single company profile rather than search. It explains where the id comes from (search/fetch output), which is helpful context, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-to-use-search statement or exclusion of alternatives.

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