get_company_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool returns data, implying a read-only operation, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'enrich' entails. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, concise sentence, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It lacks front-loaded critical details, such as what 'enrich' means or how it differs from siblings, making it less helpful despite its brevity.

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?

Given the complexity of sibling tools and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'enrich' entails, how results are structured, or when to use this over other company-related tools, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description does not add parameter information, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters to explain, aligning with the baseline for zero parameters.

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 'returns enrich company details' is vague and tautological—it essentially restates the tool name 'get_company_details' with slightly different wording. It lacks a specific verb and resource, and does not differentiate from siblings like 'get_company_by_domain' or 'get_public_profile_data_by_url'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no information on how to choose between this and sibling tools like 'get_company_by_domain'.

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