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

Annotations already declare readOnly and non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds workspace-scoping ('you can see'), one-page-at-a-time behavior, and the return shape (rows plus total and per-filter counts). It doesn't say how to detect the last page or how counts behave with filters combined, which keeps it off a 5.

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 sentences, each earning its place: what it does, when to use it vs siblings, and what comes back. The scope statement is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully discloses the return shape — one row per Company plus total and counts per filter value. Minor gaps remain around pagination termination and whether counts reflect active filters, but nothing blocks a correct call.

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 enums and defaults documented, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only recaps the filter dimensions (owner, industry, research state, source) and sort, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 Companies you can see in this Workspace, one page at a time') with scope and pagination baked in. It is immediately distinguishable from search and get_company, which are named.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this to filter by owner/industry/research state/source or to sort, use search for name lookup, and get_company for details. Both alternatives and their selecting conditions are stated.

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