get_company_performance

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool returns performance data and accepts a historical period, but does not mention read-only nature, side effects, authentication, rate limits, or what 'comprehensive' entails. Lacks behavioral detail.

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?

Description is concise with two sentences and a structured Args block. No redundant wording. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating the Args into prose, but overall well-structured.

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?

Given the tool has only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. It explains parameters but does not describe return value format, pagination, or what 'comprehensive performance data' includes. More detail would improve completeness.

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?

Description adds meaning to both parameters: company_id is 'unique identifier' and months is 'number of months of historical data'. However, with 0% schema coverage, the description only provides basic clarification and does not offer examples, constraints, or format details.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves comprehensive performance data for a specific company. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('performance data'), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_company_financial_summary or get_company_metrics.

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. No context on prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The description merely states what it does without usage recommendations.

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