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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context that the data is illustrative sample content with applications closed, but says nothing about result volume, ordering, or how role counts are computed.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the catalog nature and then the return content. No filler.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description conveys the rough return shape ('companies and their role counts') and dataset nature. However, leaving the sole parameter entirely unexplained is a meaningful gap in an otherwise simple definition.

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?

There is one parameter ('query') with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it, so an agent cannot tell whether it filters by company name, role text, or something else. The description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('List the sample companies and their role counts') and signals the demo/illustrative nature, which distinguishes it from demo_get_company. It does not explicitly name siblings, but the demo prefix plus the singular/plural distinction is inferable.

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 phrase 'Demo catalog' weakly implies a browsing/exploration context, but there is no statement of when to use this versus demo_get_company or list_published_companies, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the tool name.

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