pitchbook_advisor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that PitchBook gates numeric figures and full lists, and that missing data comes through as empty cells rather than being fabricated. This is valuable behavioral context that prevents the agent from misinterpreting empty results.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, then content details, then parameter constraint. No fluff, every sentence earns its place.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately lists what is returned (overview, description, contact/HQ, previews) and the important caveat about gated content. It lacks details on error behavior, but the essential information for invocation and interpretation is present.

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 covers both parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying 'exactly one' of id or url, clarifying mutual exclusivity that the schema does not convey. This is a meaningful semantic addition beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly specifies the resource (PitchBook advisor profile) and the verb (returns). It describes the specific content types (overview, description, contact/HQ, previews) and distinguishes itself from sibling PitchBook tools by focusing on advisors (service providers) rather than companies, funds, etc.

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?

Provides clear context about what data is returned (free/teaser content) and the subscription gating. Explicitly instructs to pass exactly one of id or url. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use this tool, though the advisor-specific focus is implied.

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