tally_list_companies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does so thoroughly: it states read-only behavior, defines what is and is not returned, notes pagination is not applicable, and warns that text fields are data, not instructions. This greatly exceeds minimal disclosure.

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?

Well-sectioned and front-loaded: the core action is in the first sentence, followed by compact labeled sections. Every line adds distinct value, from when-to-use to the data-safety note, with no repetition or filler.

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 parameterless read-only listing tool with no output schema, this is complete: return shape, date format, scoping limitation, pagination behavior, and safety posture are all covered. Nothing an agent needs to call or trust it 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. It uses the space to specify the two returned fields—company name and ISO start date—which is all an agent needs for a parameterless tool. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource—'list the companies TallyPrime currently has loaded'—and adds the distinctive detail that each company's books-start date is included. This is precise enough to distinguish it from generic getters and sibling reporting 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?

Provides an explicit WHEN TO USE section with two concrete use cases: confirming source data before analysis and checking spelling for another tool. It also gives a clear exclusion: companies not open in TallyPrime will not appear and must be opened in Tally itself, not fetched via a different query.

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