Fetch one stored public PitchBook company record by dataset ID. Use datasets_pitchbook_companies_search to find companies or datasets_pitchbook_companies_facets to inspect indexed filters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | PitchBook company id, e.g. 752821-12. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a modest behavioral hint that the record is 'stored public' (cached dataset rather than live lookup), but says nothing about return shape or miss/error behavior. With annotations carrying the safety burden, a 3 is appropriate.
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?
Two tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the routing guidance immediately after. No wasted words.
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 single-record fetch with an output schema and annotation-covered safety, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing; sibling routing is also handled.
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 is 100% and the single id parameter is already documented with a concrete example (752821-12). The description only restates 'by dataset ID', adding no format or lookup semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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 (Fetch) plus resource (one stored public PitchBook company record) and the lookup key (by dataset ID). It also distinguishes itself from the two obvious siblings, search and facets, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.
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 names the alternatives: datasets_pitchbook_companies_search to find companies and datasets_pitchbook_companies_facets to inspect indexed filters. This is a clean when-to-use-this-vs-that statement.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
