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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose that this is a GET operation and that a company must be explicitly supplied. It does not describe error behavior, rate limits, or other operational traits, but the read-only nature is clear from the HTTP method.

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 short and front-loads the endpoint path. The telegraphic phrasing is efficient, though some terms such as 'Fixed JSON' are slightly cryptic.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Still, with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves the query parameter under-specified and does not distinguish this tool from close siblings.

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 description needs to compensate. It identifies contactId in the path, states that company_name is explicitly required, and mentions that query uses flat fields, but it delegates the actual filter semantics to describe_nextesy_operation rather than explaining the query object.

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 HTTP GET endpoint and resource path for a contact sales overview, so the purpose is clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from the sibling get_contact_overview or explain what a sales overview contains.

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?

It notes that an explicit company is required and points to describe_nextesy_operation for filters, which gives some usage context. But it does not say when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_contact_overview or list_sales_orders.

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