CompanyScope

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully discloses the external data sources (Brave Search and NewsAPI), the return format (titles, descriptions, sources, dates), sorting behavior (by recency), and operational constraints (API key configuration dependency).

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?

Four tightly constructed sentences where every clause earns its place: purpose/sources, return structure, input guidance, and operational constraint. Information is front-loaded with the action verb, followed by specific behavioral details.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description appropriately covers the return value structure and sorting behavior inline. It adequately addresses the informational gaps left by missing annotations and output schema, though it could briefly mention error handling (e.g., no results found).

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 100%, providing detailed parameter documentation including examples. The description reinforces the "company name, not domain" constraint but adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 the specific action ("Get recent news articles"), the resource ("about a company"), and the data sources (Brave Search and NewsAPI). It distinguishes effectively from siblings like get_financials or get_corporate_registry, which handle different data types.

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?

Provides clear input guidance ("Use company name, not domain") that prevents incorrect usage. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, the functional distinction (news vs. registry/financials/people) is clear enough from the name and description combined.

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