list_company_press企業名または法人番号(13桁)を指定して、その企業の公開済みプレス一覧を取得します。List all published press releases for one company, by name or by 13-digit corporate number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 最大件数（既定20, 上限50） | |
| company | Yes | 企業名（部分一致）または法人番号13桁 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only mentions that press releases are 'published' (public). It does not disclose pagination behavior, default ordering, total count, error handling, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a list tool.
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, consisting of two sentences (one in Japanese, one in English). It front-loads the key verb and object. However, the bilingual repetition is somewhat redundant; a more efficient description could combine them or add extra info. Still, it is short and to the point.
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?
Given the tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks important details: pagination behavior, sorting, possible error states (e.g., company not found), and the response structure. This makes it incomplete for an agent to reliably use the tool.
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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (company: name/partial match or 13-digit number; limit: max count with default 20 and upper limit 50). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 the verb (list/get), the resource (published press releases for one company), and the two ways to identify the company (by name or 13-digit corporate number). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_press_article (which retrieves a specific article) and search_press (likely cross-company search).
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 description clearly states when to use this tool: to list all published press releases for one company. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context from sibling tool names implies that get_press_article is for a single article and search_press is for broader searches. The lack of exclusions or explicit alternatives prevents a perfect score.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: one retrieves a single article by slug, one lists all press for a company, and one searches across companies with category filters. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_press_article, list_company_press, search_press. The naming is predictable and uniform.
Three tools is slightly on the low side but appropriate for a focused read-only press retrieval server. The scope is narrow enough that each tool earns its place.
The set covers the core operations for retrieving verified press releases: single article, company listing, and search. Missing potential features like category listing or pagination metadata, but the main workflows are supported.