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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds only that it returns profile and active listings, which is data scope rather than behavioral traits. No rate limits, pagination, or other behavioral details are mentioned, but with strong annotations, the lack of contradiction and some added context is acceptable.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence: 'Company profile + active listings by company slug.' It contains no superfluous words and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 a single required parameter, an output schema, and rich annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), the description is sufficient. It clearly states what the tool returns, and the output schema covers return-value details. Nothing critical is missing for this low-complexity 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with the description 'Remotive company slug' for the required `slug` parameter. The tool description reinforces that the slug identifies the company and that output includes listings, but it does not add beyond the schema's semantic detail. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a company profile and active listings for a given company slug. This specific verb-less phrasing is unambiguous and distinguishes it from siblings like entity_profile by describing the exact data scope.

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 use when you have a company slug and need profile plus listings, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like entity_profile or search. There are no usage exclusions or alternative comparisons.

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