get_competitor_detail

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It only lists what data is included but does not disclose read-only nature, error handling, rate limits, or response format. Incomplete for a read operation with rich output.

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?

Single efficient sentence with no redundancy. All words add value.

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?

Despite having only 2 parameters and high schema coverage, the tool returns complex composite data (reviews, products, hiring signals, ads) with no output schema. Description omits structure, pagination, or error handling, which is inadequate for an AI agent.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description's mention of categories aligns with valid include values but adds no new syntax or behavioral detail.

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 it returns detailed info about a specific competitor with listed categories (reviews, products, etc.), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_competitors' or 'get_reviews', but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_reviews' for reviews only, 'list_competitors' for overview). No preconditions or exclusions mentioned.

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