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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Full verified record' usefully signals that the response is complete and trustworthy versus a partial hit from search, and 'get' implies a safe read, but auth needs, rate limits, and error behavior are undisclosed.

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 with the purpose front-loaded and the parameter provenance folded into a parenthetical. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter read lookup with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it returns, how to get the identifier, and which sibling precedes it. It stops short of describing response shape, but the 'full record' framing is acceptable here.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the schema only gives type and maxLength. The description compensates by explaining where the slug comes from (search_companies or a profile URL), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about its expected format or case sensitivity.

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 resource and scope: a single, full verified company record. It also names the sibling search_companies as the source of the slug, so an agent can immediately tell how this differs from the search tool.

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 parenthetical makes the usage path clear: call this after search_companies or take the slug from a profile URL. It gives clear context for when the tool applies but states no exclusions or failure conditions (e.g. unknown slug).

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