dealdesk.add_company_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it is thin. 'Add' implies a write, but it says nothing about required permissions, whether the note is appended, or what the response returns. The 'structured note' phrasing is the only real context beyond the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, naming verb, resource, and payload up front. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tight conciseness.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key behavioral questions open: auth/permission needs, what happens on success, and how it differs from patch_company_note. The schema covers most parameters, but the behavioral envelope is incomplete.

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 coverage is 75%, and the description's '(title + body)' maps to the title/text parameters, reinforcing the structure. However, companyId has no schema description, and the description only indirectly implies it points to a customer-directory company rather than adding explicit meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (add), resource (note), and target scope (customer-directory company), with the parenthetical '(title + body)' clarifying the payload shape. The 'company' target implicitly distinguishes it from sibling add_card_note and add_contact_note, though it does not name them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the natural alternative patch_company_note for editing existing notes. The agent must infer from the name alone that this creates rather than modifies.

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