dealdesk.get_company_commercial_summary

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. It implies a read-only aggregation (open/won/lost breakdown) but says nothing about auth/project scoping requirements, time window or stage definitions, pagination, or how linked records are counted — all substantive gaps for a summary endpoint.

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 compact sentence with the resource and the return contents front-loaded; no filler or redundancy. It is perhaps terse to the point of under-specification, but structurally efficient.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema and one of two parameters undocumented, the description would need to fill more of the gaps. It names what is returned but omits time range, currency/aggregation basis, and access constraints an agent needs before invoking it.

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 50%: projectId is described in the schema as needing to match the API key/OAuth project, but companyId has no description anywhere. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so it fails to compensate for the uncovered parameter.

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+resource ('get_company_commercial_summary' for a company) and enumerates the returned content: open/won/lost pipeline value plus linked deals, quotes and orders. It is distinguishable from the sibling get_contact_commercial_summary by scope, though it doesn't name that sibling or otherwise route explicitly.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus get_company, portfolio_summary, get_quote_summary or the contact variant. The purpose is implied by the name and one-line description, but no conditions, prerequisites or alternatives are given.

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