get_company

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It says 'Fetch', which implies a non-mutating read, but it does not disclose behavior such as error handling, return format, or access requirements. The description is minimal and leaves some ambiguity, though the operation is simple.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that immediately communicates the purpose. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it well front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 the low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's basic function. It could be more complete by detailing the return value or error cases, but those are not essential for such a straightforward read operation.

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?

The input schema fully describes the only parameter 'id' with a clear example, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The description merely references 'by ID' without adding new semantics, so the baseline of 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 'Fetch a specific B2B company by ID' clearly states the action (fetch), the target resource (specific B2B company), and the discriminator (by ID). This distinguishes it from the plural get_companies and mutation tools like create_company or update_company.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving a single company when you have its ID, which differentiates it from listing or creating companies. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternative tool names, so it stops short of full guidance.

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