pitchbook_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly discloses that numeric figures are gated behind a paid subscription and appear as empty cells, and that the returned content is a teaser. This provides essential behavioral context beyond schema.

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, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy. It efficiently conveys purpose, limitations, and parameter usage in a few lines.

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 absence of an output schema, the description thoroughly explains what data is returned (overview, description, contact, funding-round history without dollar amounts, preview of investors, etc.) and what is missing (gated figures). This is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 describes each parameter individually with 100% coverage, but the description adds the crucial constraint of mutual exclusivity ('Pass exactly one of `id` or `url`'), which is not in the schema. This addition helps the agent avoid invalid parameter combinations.

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 it returns the free/teaser content of a PitchBook company profile page and lists specific sections (overview, description, contact, funding-round history without dollar amounts, etc.). It differentiates from sibling tools like pitchbook_fund and pitchbook_investor by focusing on company profiles.

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 explicitly states to pass exactly one of `id` or `url`, offering clear parameter usage. It explains the free vs. gated data, setting expectations for when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not directly compare to sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use scenarios.

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