get_reference_company_onboarding_readiness

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds little behavioral insight; 'List secret-free choices' hints at output content but does not elaborate on side effects, return format, or any operational details beyond what annotations already cover.

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 a single concise sentence, but its phrasing is cryptic and not easily understood. It is brief yet sacrifices clarity, making it less effective than a slightly longer but clearer description.

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 description lacks essential context: it does not explain 'secret-free choices,' 'quarantined reference company,' or what the tool returns. Given the cryptic terminology and the existence of similar tools, the description is incomplete for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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 schema provides no descriptions for company_ref or project_ref, and the description does not mention either parameter. With 0% schema coverage and no compensating explanation in the description, the parameters remain completely unexplained.

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 a verb ('List') and a resource ('secret-free choices for the exact quarantined reference company'), but the resource is cryptic and unclear. It gives no indication of what 'secret-free choices' or a 'quarantined reference company' means, nor does it clearly distinguish from similar tools like 'preview_reference_company_onboarding'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or situations where this tool is preferred over sibling tools such as preview_reference_company_onboarding or get_company_blueprint_certification_candidate.

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