get_company_by_domain

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

The description mentions a credit cost ('1 credit per successful request'), which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries full burden and is insufficient.

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 very concise with one sentence plus a bolded cost note. It is efficient but lacks detail; it could benefit from more context without being verbose.

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 simple tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what data is returned, how 'enrich' works, or how to properly specify the domain. The credit cost is noted, but overall context is lacking.

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 description coverage is 100% (one parameter with example). The description adds little beyond the schema, mentioning 'by domain' but not clarifying the format or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already covers the parameter.

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 states 'Enrich the company data by domain', which indicates the tool returns company data based on a domain. However, the verb 'enrich' is ambiguous and does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools like get_company_details or get_company_details_by_id, which likely serve similar purposes.

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. The sibling tools include various company detail tools, but the description does not specify contexts or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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