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

The annotations already mark it readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description goes well beyond that by disclosing truncation behavior: max 25 items per list, last 20 activities, and a `meer` field giving per-list hidden counts. It also clarifies that documents appear by name only ("geen inhoud"), which prevents a wrong expectation about payload size.

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 resource and then the return shape, with no filler. The stacked parentheticals ("(ook die van zijn contacten en deals; geen inhoud) (elk hoogstens 25)") are dense and slightly harder to parse than necessary.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the full burden of explaining returns — and it does, listing every section plus size caps and the `meer` overflow indicator. Nothing an agent needs to call this read-only lookup correctly is missing.

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 both parameters are self-documented, so the schema baseline is already met. The description still adds real meaning by stating that either bedrijf_id or domein can be supplied — an either/or constraint the schema does not encode since neither parameter is required.

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 names a specific resource ("Dossier van één bedrijf") and enumerates exactly what it returns: gegevens, contacten, deals, document names, and recent activities. The word "één" combined with the explicit content list distinguishes it from the sibling list tool crm_bedrijven and from crm_contact without ambiguity.

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 closing line "Geef bedrijf_id of domein" implies the lookup modes, and "Dossier van één bedrijf" implies it is for single-record retrieval. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over crm_bedrijven (list) or crm_contact, nor when not to use it.

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