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

The description states the tool performs housekeeping by ensuring the personal company exists and converting waiting email invitations into memberships, which are write operations. This directly contradicts the readOnlyHint=true annotation, which declares the tool does not modify its environment.

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 core purpose is front-loaded, followed by usage, side effects, header semantics, fields, and errors. It is longer than average but structured, and most sentences add materially useful information.

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, the description still explains key response fields such as currentCompanyId, companyLimit, companiesCreated, and onboardedAt. It also covers auth errors and the fallback behavior when the optional header is missing or invalid.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description also explains response fields and optional header behavior, though those are not formal input parameters.

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 and resource: returns the signed-in person and every company they can open with roles. It also names the tool's role as the first call after sign-in, making it clearly distinguishable from sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly says this is the first call after sign-in and that almost every other call needs a company id from companies[].id. It also states any signed-in person may call it and explains the optional x-company-id header behavior.

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