Look Up Company Website

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the behavioral context of credit usage, which goes beyond annotations but does not elaborate on other behaviors like error handling or return format.

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 two concise sentences, each adding value: one for purpose, one for credit usage. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 is simple and the schema and annotations cover most aspects. However, there is no description of the output format (e.g., what is returned if no website found, or if multiple possible URLs). This gap makes it less complete for an agent to fully understand behavior.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, both parameters are already documented. The description does not provide additional semantic information beyond the schema; it merely states the tool's purpose, so it meets the baseline but adds no extra value.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Find the best website URL for a company name.' It uses a specific verb ('Find') and identifies the resource ('website URL'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'find_company_emails' or 'find_person_email'.

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 mentions that the tool 'Uses Potarix Enricher API credits,' implying consumption of credits but not providing explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use instructions are given.

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