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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat safety. It does add context with 'bounded request' and 'demo mode allows selected sample domains', which provides a useful constraint, though demo mode remains vague.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action and scope. The demo-mode sentence adds useful context, though it is somewhat imprecise and could arguably be refined without harming clarity.

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 single-parameter read-only batch tool with strong annotations and 100% schema coverage, the description is almost complete. It lacks detail on what a returned 'company profile' contains and on demo-mode sample selection, but the low complexity makes this a minor 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 description coverage is 100%, with the domains parameter clearly documented including min/max items, example values, and comma-separated string acceptance. The description adds no parameter details, but the baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic load.

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 it returns multiple company profiles by domain in one bounded request, conveying both the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from single-domain lookups through 'multiple' and from unbounded queries through 'bounded', though it does not name sibling tools 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?

The 'multiple company profiles by domain in one bounded request' phrasing implies batch usage when several domains are needed at once, which is a weak usage cue. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative to choose (e.g., company_domain for a single lookup).

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