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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it specifically returns a paginated list and only active jobs, not all jobs or company metadata. This enriches the agent's understanding of response shape and filtering behavior.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It conveys the core action and key scope details ('full profile', 'paginated list', 'active jobs') with zero 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?

Given the output schema is present (not shown here but flagged), the description covers the essential content: profile data plus a paginated active-jobs list. Combined with complete parameter docs and annotations, the tool is well-specified. Minor gap: no mention of behavior for non-existent slugs, but this is a minor omission for a read-only fetch 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 description coverage is 100%: all three parameters (slug, page, per_page) are fully described in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate per rubric.

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?

Clearly states the specific verb 'Fetch' and the precise resource: 'a single company's full profile plus a paginated list of its active jobs.' This instantly distinguishes it from siblings like get_job (single job) and list_companies (many companies).

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 implies its use case: retrieving detailed data for one company, including its active jobs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is unambiguous given sibling tool names. A brief exclusionary note (e.g., 'for multiple companies, use list_companies') would make it a 5.

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