list_companies

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states it lists companies with filters but does not disclose pagination behavior (page_size parameter not explained), return format, or whether it is read-only. Basic behavior is implied but incomplete.

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 sentence is concise and front-loaded with purpose and filters. No wasted words, but could be slightly expanded to include pagination or result count for completeness without losing conciseness.

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 4 optional parameters and lack of annotations, description does not cover important context like default behavior with no filters, pagination via page_size, or output structure (though output schema exists, it is not referenced). Adequate for a very simple tool but not complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning for three of four parameters (name, email, updated_after) by listing them as filters. However, page_size is omitted, and no value descriptions or formats are provided for the filters, leaving some gaps.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'companies', with mention of filters. However, it does not differentiate from other list_* sibling tools such as list_clients or list_cases, which have similar patterns.

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 other list tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or related sibling tools.

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