get_company_insights_premium

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

With no annotations provided, the description effectively discloses key behavioral traits: the cost (5 credits per call) and the failure policy (no charge). This adds value beyond the schema, though it omits details like read-only nature or authentication requirements.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that convey purpose, cost, and risk. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and cost. It could elaborate on what the output contains, but the references to 'Insight Details' and 'Company Details' provide enough context for an agent familiar with the domain.

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 already provides a description for the 'username' parameter (example value: 'amazon'), resulting in 100% coverage. The tool description does not add further meaning about parameter usage or constraints, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the tool retrieves both 'Company Insight Details' and 'Company Details' in a single request, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company_details, which likely returns only one type of data.

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 implies usage when both insight and company details are needed, and highlights a cost and failure policy. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools like get_company_details for separate requests.

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