hires_list_companies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this is a read-only list operation with pagination, but does not elaborate on filtering, sorting, default behavior, or the structure of the response. This is adequate but leaves room for more transparency.

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 one concise sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and includes relevant usage context. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 list operation with only two self-explanatory parameters and full schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context. It states the scope and purpose, though it does not describe the return format since no output schema exists.

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 fully describes both parameters (page and size) with clear descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond referencing 'pagination', which the parameters already imply.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'partner-accessible companies', clearly distinguishing it from other list_* siblings. The additional context of 'tenant discovery and management panels' clarifies the intended use case.

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 description states a clear context for when to use the tool ('tenant discovery and management panels'), which helps the agent choose it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for comparison.

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