Search Companies

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, lowering the burden. The description adds valuable context: it returns compact summaries optimized for large result sets and includes company slugs and contact_slugs for building Recruit CRM links. This exceeds what annotations provide.

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 focused sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states the main purpose, the second gives a key filtering tip, and the third explains the output slug values for links. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a tool with 16 parameters, the schema covers all parameters and an output schema exists. The description explains the core use case, filtering via owner_id, and the link structure. It does not discuss pagination, but page and limit are clearly defined in the schema, and the output schema covers return details.

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?

All 16 parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the owner_id usage by referencing list_users, but this information is already in the schema's owner_id description. No additional parameter syntax or format details are provided beyond the schema.

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 searches Recruit CRM companies and returns compact summaries designed for large result sets, distinguishing it from list_companies and get_company_details. The verb 'search' plus the resource 'companies' is specific and 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 provides explicit guidance on using owner_id to scope results to a specific user and directs the agent to list_users for resolving user IDs. It also frames the tool as suitable for large result sets, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like list_companies or other search tools.

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