Search companies by name or status. Supports pagination with up to 200 results per page.
Search companies by name or status. Max 200/page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| isActive | No | ||
| pageSize | No | Max 200 | |
| searchTerm | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.18.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral burden. Only mentions max 200/page; missing details on case sensitivity, match behavior, default sort, or permissions. Insufficient for a search tool.
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?
Single sentence is concise but omits important details like default pagination or return format. Strikes a balance but lacks completeness.
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?
No output schema, so description should explain return values. Does not mention format or pagination behavior beyond max. Incomplete given 4 parameters and zero annotation coverage.
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?
Description adds meaning for searchTerm and isActive (name/status), but schema coverage is only 25%. Adds some value beyond schema for two parameters, but not for page or other aspects.
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?
Description clearly states it searches companies by name or status, which distinguishes it from siblings like autotask_search_tickets or autotask_search_contacts.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives. Implied by the entity type, but no when-not or context differentiation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.