accelo_get_company

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden, yet it only says what is fetched. It does not disclose behavior on a missing/invalid ID, required permissions, or what the returned payload contains.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the fields example earns its place. No filler or redundant restatement.

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?

For a simple read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers enough to invoke it, but leaves return shape, error behavior, and field expansion rules to guesswork.

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%, so the description must compensate. It documents both parameters: 'id: Company ID' is largely tautological, but the 'fields' example with nested syntax (postal_address(city)) adds real value beyond the bare string type. Still thin on the id semantics and field syntax limits.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get a single company by ID.' It clearly distinguishes a single-record fetch from listing, but does not name or differentiate itself from siblings like accelo_list_companies or accelo_count_companies.

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 versus accelo_list_companies (to search) or accelo_get_company variants. No prerequisites or exclusions are given; the agent must infer the use case purely from the verb 'get'.

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