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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds that results are cursor-paginated and that field selection is available, which is useful context beyond the annotation. It does not describe the pagination response shape (next_page_token) or default/empty-filter 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and the capability summary is compact. The trailing 'Keap: GET /companies' is minor mapping detail rather than filler, so little is wasted.

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 no output schema, the agent gets no description of the returned record shape or the pagination envelope, which matters for a list endpoint that paginates. Five parameters and the read-only annotation are otherwise well covered, so the gap is moderate rather than severe.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, including the filter syntax example and the page_size maximum and page_token origin. The description only restates the categories of parameters, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List companies in the Keap CRM'), which clearly separates it from the singular keap_get_company and from other list tools such as keap_list_contacts. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls short of the top tier.

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?

Lists the supported capabilities (filtering, ordering, field selection, pagination) but never says when to use this versus keap_get_company for a single record or another list endpoint. Usage is implied by the capability list rather than stated.

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