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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantive behavior: descending YoY order with code-ascending tie-break, that the sample count reflects rankable companies before truncation, and that companies missing revenue or YoY are excluded. Those exclusion and truncation rules are real context an agent cannot get from the annotations.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by ordering and exclusion rules. No filler, though the tie-break detail is slightly ahead of more essential parameter context.

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 no output schema and low parameter coverage, the description should explain what the truncated ranked list looks like and how limit affects it. It hints at truncation via the sample-count sentence but does not close the gap.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'industry' expects the complete industry name and that sort is limited to yoy, but says nothing about the meaning of limit or how month omission interacts with ranking.

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 states a specific verb and resource: query companies in a given industry for the same month, ranked by YoY growth. It is clearly narrower than siblings like search_company or top_growth, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus top_growth or search_company, nor any exclusion guidance beyond 'sort only supports yoy'. The reader must infer that this is the industry-scoped ranking variant.

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