accelo_list_companies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful constraints such as page being 0-indexed and limit max 100, and implies a read operation via 'List', but says nothing about pagination behavior, return format, or permissions.

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?

Front-loads the purpose before a well-organized Args block; every listed item adds value. Slightly verbose with a long filter key list, but that detail is functional rather than filler.

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 list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers inputs thoroughly. It does not need to explain return values, though it omits any note on pagination semantics or total-count behavior, which would be the only remaining gap.

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%, so the description must compensate fully, and it does: it enumerates the supported filter keys, documents the order_by fields, gives field-selection syntax examples ('website,phone,postal_address(city)', '_ALL'), names the searchable fields, and specifies page indexing and the limit cap.

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+resource ('List companies from Accelo') and enumerates its capabilities (filtering, field selection, search). An agent can distinguish it from accelo_get_company and accelo_count_companies via the 'List' verb, though the description does not explicitly name those siblings.

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?

Usage is implied by 'optional filtering, field selection, and search' and the parameter hints, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over accelo_get_company (single record) or accelo_count_companies (counts), nor any exclusion guidance.

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