seerr_list_search_company

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

The description adds no behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or any search semantics, so the agent receives no extra information about how the tool operates.

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 concise in length (one sentence) but is under-specified rather than genuinely informative. It provides no structure or detail beyond a bare statement of the tool's action.

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 2 parameters, an output schema, and a readOnly annotation, the description is insufficient for an agent to know how to invoke the tool correctly or interpret results. It lacks usage context, parameter details, and behavioral expectations.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'query' or 'page' parameters beyond what their names imply. It fails to describe query formatting, what query represents, or how pagination works, which is critical for a search tool.

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 a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('companies'), which distinguishes it from sibling search tools like seerr_list_search and seerr_list_search_keyword. However, it doesn't specify what type of companies (e.g., production companies), so the purpose is clear but slightly ambiguous.

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 such as seerr_list_search or seerr_list_search_keyword. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, exclusions, or how it differs from other search tools.

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