crm_search_companies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it's a search operation. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' and 'after' in schema but not described), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens on errors. The description adds minimal value beyond the tool name.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though its brevity contributes to lack of detail.

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 complexity (5 parameters with nested structures, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain input semantics, output format, or behavioral context, making it inadequate for a search tool with rich filtering capabilities.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'company-specific filters' which loosely relates to 'filterGroups' but doesn't explain parameter purposes, required vs. optional fields, or how filters work. With 5 parameters (1 required) and no schema descriptions, the description adds insufficient meaning.

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 'Search companies with company-specific filters' states the verb ('Search') and resource ('companies'), but is vague about what 'company-specific filters' means. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like crm_search_contacts or crm_search_leads beyond the resource type, nor does it specify search scope or result format.

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 like crm_list_objects or crm_get_company, nor any prerequisites or context for usage. The description implies filtering but doesn't specify when filtering is appropriate or necessary.

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