companies_list

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read-only operation (listing) and mentions output usage, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, pagination, or error handling. The description is adequate but not fully transparent.

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, highly concise. The first sentence states the action and relevant connections; the second explains output usage. No wasted words, well front-loaded.

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?

The description is nearly complete for a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema. It explains the purpose and output usage, but could be more complete by mentioning typical output fields (e.g., name, connection type).

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the output usage (returned ID for downstream tools), which meets the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 it lists accounting companies connected to the Importer account, specifying QuickBooks Online and Xero. It also instructs to use the returned ID for downstream tools, which differentiates it from siblings like entities_list or mappings_list.

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 guidance on using the returned 'id' as companyId for downstream tools, indicating a clear use case. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it, which would improve decision-making.

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