List outsourcing companies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: each entry contains an identifier and both English and Arabic names, and the output is intended for resolving names to stable IDs. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states action and output, the second states the purpose. No wasted words or redundant restatement of schema or annotations.

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 read-only list with no required parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns, why an agent would call it, and pagination is already handled by the schema. Nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, and both cursor and pageSize already have clear descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Lists the organization's outsourcing companies.' It also enumerates the key return fields (identifier, English and Arabic names), making the tool's purpose concrete. The resource is unique among the sibling list tools, so an agent can distinguish it from departments, locations, or nationalities lists.

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 usage context: 'Use these to resolve names to stable identifiers before filtering other tools.' This tells the agent when this tool is the right first step, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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