datasets_pitchbook_companies_item

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 adds some useful context by noting the data is 'crawled' and from a specific dataset (`pitchbook-companies`). However, it does not disclose error behavior, rate limits, or output format, which could be relevant for an agent.

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 concise, with two sentences that front-load the main action ('Get a PitchBook company from dataset') and then provide necessary specifics. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 item-fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It states the return type ('one record'), the dataset id, and the lookup key ('by id'). It could be slightly more complete by mentioning how to obtain the id (e.g., via search) or what the record contains, but this is not a major gap.

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 has one parameter (`id`) with full description coverage (100%), including an example. The tool description adds minimal semantic value by referencing 'by id' and the dataset id, but does not meaningfully elaborate on the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get a PitchBook company from dataset' and specifies it returns one record by id from a specific dataset (`pitchbook-companies`). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `datasets_pitchbook_companies_search` and `datasets_pitchbook_companies_facets`.

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 the usage context by requiring an id ('Returns one... record by id'), which signals that the user must have a specific PitchBook id. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like search or facets, nor does it mention prerequisites beyond the id.

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