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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by enumerating the returned fields and explicitly warning to use exact IDs and not guess them, which is useful behavioral guidance beyond the annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then output contents, then an important usage warning. No filler or redundant information.

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 properly enumerates return fields. It covers the required input intent and warns about ID handling. Pagination and filtering are already fully described in the parameter schema, so no additional explanation is required there. Sibling differentiation is adequate though not explicit.

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%, so parameters are already well documented. The description's 'Use these exact IDs; do not guess them' adds a caution but doesn't add significant semantic detail about any parameter beyond what the schema already states.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), resource ('stored companies'), and scope ('from one Salesbot company list'). This clearly differentiates from the sibling list_company_lists, which lists the lists themselves rather than the companies within one list.

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 'from one Salesbot company list' implies you need an existing list ID, and the schema note that company_list_id comes from list_company_lists provides some context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use list_company_lists to get available list IDs' or 'use list_contacts for contacts.'

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