Find Breakout Companies

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that results are sorted by growth descending, include recent monthly job counts, and use a default threshold of 50%. No contradictions. Describes behavior beyond annotations.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the tool, the second gives usage context and audience. Highly efficient.

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 3 optional parameters with full schema coverage, readOnly annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains output (companies sorted, with job counts) and purpose. Could benefit from clarifying 'trendPct' or output format, but overall complete for this complexity level.

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% with all parameters documented. The description reiterates default values (50% threshold, 20 limit, 20 minJobs) but does not add new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool returns companies with extreme hiring growth, sorted descending, with job counts. The verb 'find' and resource 'breakout companies' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'find_companies' by targeting 'extreme hiring growth' and 'analyst tier'.

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?

Explicit use cases given: 'who's scaling fastest right now?' and 'find companies doubling their hiring'. Implicitly indicates when to use this over general search tools, but does not explicitly state when not to use it. Still clear guidance.

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