add_company

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 adds useful traits: no job lookup occurs, names match case-insensitively, and tracking can be done ahead of time. However, it does not disclose duplicate behavior, persistence effects, or what happens for an invalid or unknown slug.

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 tight sentences plus an Args line with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, the timing context follows, and each sentence adds a distinct piece of needed information.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the core purpose, parameter source, and matching behavior are covered, so the definition is largely complete. It falls slightly short by not saying whether duplicate companies are ignored/error and whether the slug must already exist in Ashby.

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 has 0% description coverage and one generic string parameter, so this description must compensate. It does so by defining company as 'the company's slug from jobs.ashbyhq.com/{slug}', giving the agent an exact format and source. This is decisive for choosing the right value.

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 opens with a specific action and object: 'Track a company by name' and explicitly scopes it as 'without looking up its jobs yet,' which distinguishes it from list_jobs and job-lookup siblings. It names the exact resource and the intent.

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?

It gives a concrete usage condition: companies are normally tracked automatically when list_jobs runs, but this tool is for adding one ahead of time. This is clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not explicitly list exclusions or point to alternatives like check_company or remove_company.

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