bc_list_companies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well. It discloses internal behavior (opens and closes the BC Companies system page), states it does not affect open pages or session state, and confirms no parameters are required. It lacks mention of potential errors or permissions, but for a list operation this is sufficient.

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 well-structured across three short paragraphs: purpose/return, internal behavior, and usage guidance. Each sentence adds value, though slightly longer than strictly necessary. It is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states the return content, side effects, internal mechanism, and when to use alternatives. It does not detail the exact array structure, but the absence of an output schema is mitigated by describing the returned information.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema documents this completely. The description adds the explicit confirmation that no parameters are required, which is consistent. With no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 applies.

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 lists all companies in the current Business Central environment and returns an array of company names plus the active company. It uses a specific verb plus resource, and explicitly distinguishes itself from bc_switch_company and other sibling tools.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: use before bc_switch_company to verify target company existence. It also gives a clear exclusion: do NOT use if you already know the company name, and directs to alternatives (bc_switch_company directly, or bc_switch_company followed by bc_open_page).

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