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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the matching behavior (id first, then case-insensitive name), the role split, and the match_method field. It also explains the data nuance about null target IDs, providing complete transparency.

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?

Three clear sentences: what the tool does, how it matches, and what it returns. No unnecessary words, well-structured.

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 tool with no output schema, the description fully explains the return structure (deals grouped by role, with match_method) and the rationale behind the matching logic, making it complete.

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 covers the one parameter well. Description adds significant value by explaining the matching fallback, role split, and match_method, which goes beyond the schema's description of the input.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns every M&A deal a company participated in, split by role (acquirer, target, other). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_deals which likely returns all deals.

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?

Describes the matching logic and when fallback to name matching is necessary. Could be more explicit about when to use this vs. alternatives like get_deals or get_deal, but the context is clear enough.

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