freshdesk_create_companyCreate a company. name is required. Freshdesk REST: POST /companies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The company name (required). | |
| note | No | A note about the company. | |
| domains | No | Email domains associated with the company. | |
| description | No | Freeform description / notes. | |
| custom_fields | No | Custom field values, keyed by field name. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the creation action itself. It does not disclose potential side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or authentication requirements. The annotation destructiveHint=true is misleading for a create operation, and the description does not clarify or correct this.
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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the core purpose. Every word earns its place, and it avoids unnecessary detail.
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 adequate for a simple create tool but lacks context about return values, custom field structure, or domain formatting. With no output schema, the agent is left unaware of the response shape. The schema covers parameter details, but the description does not compensate for missing behavioral or usage context.
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 input schema already provides descriptions for all five parameters, so the description adds little value. It only reiterates that 'name' is required, which is already in the schema's required array. The baseline of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.
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 action 'Create a company' with a specific resource (company) and a direct reference to the REST endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_contact and create_ticket.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_company or list_companies. The description only mentions that 'name' is required, but does not explain conditions, exclusions, or comparisons to other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.