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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, signaling this is a safe read operation. The description adds the REST endpoint but doesn't disclose any additional behavioral traits such as error handling, rate limits, or response details. It adds minimal value beyond what annotations already convey.

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 two short sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and includes the REST endpoint as a useful reference. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter, the description plus annotations and schema provide complete context. There is no output schema, but for a GET-by-id operation, the return is straightforward and doesn't need elaboration. The tool is adequately documented.

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 has 100% description coverage for the 'id' parameter ('The company id.'), so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by id' aligns with the schema but doesn't add any extra meaning or formatting details beyond what's already present.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a single company by id'), clearly distinguishing it from list_companies (which retrieves multiple companies) and create_company. The REST endpoint reference adds precision and reinforces the intended operation.

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 phrase 'single company by id' clearly indicates when to use this tool: when you have a specific company ID and need one record. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough that an agent would know to use list_companies for fetching all companies or search for finding by name.

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