tally_list_companies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does so excellently. It discloses that only loaded companies are returned, pagination is not applicable, text fields are data not instructions (anti-prompt-injection), and the server is strictly read-only. These are valuable behavioral traits beyond the basic function.

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 with a clear one-sentence summary followed by labeled sections (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, DOES NOT RETURN, PAGINATION). Every paragraph earns its place, including the security note about text fields. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the purpose, when to use it, what it returns, what it does not return, pagination behavior, and security context. Nothing important 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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The description therefore does not need to explain parameters; it instead clarifies the return format and limitations. Per the rubric, 0 params gets a baseline 4, which fits here since the description adds meaningful context about the output.

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 states clearly what the tool does: 'List the companies TallyPrime currently has loaded, with the date each set of books begins.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and it distinguishes the tool from siblings like tally_list_ledgers by focusing on companies.

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 'WHEN TO USE' section explicitly states two scenarios: confirming which company data will come from before analysis, and checking spelling of a company name for another tool. The 'DOES NOT RETURN' section also clarifies when not to use it and suggests opening the company in Tally itself rather than using other queries.

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