Get Company Details

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that calls run in parallel for up to 10 companies and that partial failures return an errors array with status_code. This adds valuable context about concurrency and error behavior not visible in 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?

Three sentences efficiently cover purpose, usage, and error behavior without redundancy. The key action is front-loaded, and every sentence adds informational value.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present, read-only annotations), the description fully covers parallel fetching, partial results, and usage context. No additional behavioral detail is needed.

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 schema covers 100% of the parameter info, including min/max items, uniqueness, and a description of company_slugs. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool fetches full details for up to 10 companies by slug, distinguishing it from search_companies (which resolves slugs) and list_companies (bulk scans). The verb 'fetches' plus resource 'company details' makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly says when to use (after slug resolution from search_companies) and when not to use (bulk database scans), giving clear guidance on alternatives. The mention of partial results also sets expectations for error handling.

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