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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of retrieving 'owner metadata' adds useful context without contradicting annotations. No further behavioral details are needed for a read-only operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately follow with usage guidance. Every word contributes value without 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It mentions what data is returned ('profile and owner metadata'), though a full list of fields is not provided. Given the low complexity, this is sufficient.

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% with a single parameter 'id' documented as 'Company ID.' The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema. With high coverage, a score of 3 is baseline.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get company profile and owner metadata.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like hires_get_application by focusing on company data.

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 explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'Use before updates or ownership-sensitive actions.' This provides clear context and implies it should precede write operations like hires_update_company.

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