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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: details data sources for company (SEC EDGAR/XBRL, specific financial metrics) and drug (FAERS, FDA, trials), explains sorting by primary metric, and mentions citation URIs. No contradiction with 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?

Dense with information but slightly verbose. Front-loaded with example queries. Every sentence adds value, though some redundancy could be trimmed.

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?

Complete for a tool with 2 parameters and no output schema. Explains input, data returned per entity type, citation URIs, and sorting. No gaps.

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 100%, description adds meaning: explains what each entity type returns and gives concrete examples for 'values' parameter (e.g., '["AAPL","MSFT"]'), including format and constraints.

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 clearly states 'side-by-side comparison of 2–5 companies or drugs in ONE parallel call.' Uses specific verb 'compare' and resource types. Distinguishes from sibling tools like entity_profile by emphasizing multi-entity comparison replacing sequential lookups.

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 states 'ALWAYS PREFER over sequential single-pack lookups when comparing entities.' Provides example queries and notes efficiency gains ('Replaces 8–15 sequential lookups'). Clear guidance on when to use.

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