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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it resolves by current/former names, excludes low-signal officers, sorts active edges first, and clarifies that ceased edges are historical links not to be reported as current. This goes beyond what annotations would typically cover (e.g., sorting behavior, historical link warning). The description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden and does so thoroughly.

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 at ~80 words and front-loaded with the key purpose. Every sentence adds value (relationship types, exclusion rule, query purpose, edge status, sorting behavior, renaming handling, external link). One minor improvement would be to avoid the technical parenthetical '(shared_officer — apoderados...)' which could be slightly clearer, but overall it's well-structured without redundancy.

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?

The description is complete for a discovery tool with good sibling context. It explains the relationship types, edge lifecycle (active/ceased), sorting, and entity resolution. Without an output schema, the description could hint at the return structure (e.g., that each connection includes a 'status' field), but it does mention that shared_officer edges carry status. A minor gap: it doesn't specify whether owns/owned_by edges have any status concept. Overall very good.

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% (both 'name' and 'slug' are documented in the schema). The description adds value by explaining fuzzy resolution and the slug being from mapasocietario /empresa, but these are largely redundant with the schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents both parameters well.

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 tool shows companies connected to a Spanish company via three specific relationship types (shared_officer, owns, owned_by), and explicitly answers 'is there a relationship between company X and company Y?'. It provides specific detail about what is included/excluded (e.g., apoderados and representatives excluded from shared_officer) and the resolving behavior. This is a specific verb+resource+scope that distinguishes it from siblings like search_companies or get_company.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('answers is there a relationship...') and what it covers (Spanish company, specific connection types). It provides critical guidance on not reporting ceased edges as current ones. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the sibling tools (get_company, search_companies, search_officers) are contextually distinct, and the description makes when-to-use unambiguous. The implicit not-for-free-text-search or general company lookup is clear.

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