GET /companies (Company)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by disclosing pagination behavior, the requirement for the 'limit' parameter for new pagination, and the deprecation timeline. It also notes that array parameters accept multiple comma-separated values, which is not fully covered by the 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 consists of three sentences: purpose, note about array parameters, and a pagination warning. It is relatively concise and front-loaded with the most critical information. The warning about mandatory 'limit' is important and placed as the last sentence, which is acceptable. Could be slightly more streamlined but overall effective.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should clarify the return format (e.g., an array of company objects). It does not mention what fields are returned, pagination structure (e.g., next page token), or any default ordering. For a list tool with 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. Additionally, the use of Portuguese may reduce comprehensibility for some agents.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds general guidance that parameters defined as array can accept multiple comma-separated values, which complements the schema. While some parameters like 'city' lack that detail in schema, the description provides a helpful overarching rule. The baseline is 3 due to high coverage, but the extra context justifies a 4.

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 'Listagem paginada de Unidades' which indicates a paginated listing of units (companies). The tool name and title reinforce that it lists companies. It distinguishes from sibling list_* tools by specifying the resource. However, the Portuguese term 'Unidades' may be unclear to some English-speaking agents.

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 usage for listing companies with pagination and provides a crucial warning about the mandatory 'limit' parameter for new pagination. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_company or other list_* tools, leaving the agent to infer based on resource name.

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