get_company_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses returned fields and a deliberate scope limitation (omits live quote), but does not state read-only safety, permission needs, or rate limits. The read-only nature is strongly implied by the 'get' verb and profile data, but not made explicit.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return fields, then the sibling routing. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

Lists return fields in lieu of an output schema, but leaves the required symbol parameter undocumented and does not compensate for the absence of annotations regarding safety or authentication. Adequate for a simple read tool, but with clear gaps.

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 description coverage for the single required 'symbol' parameter is 0%, and the description never mentions the parameter, its format, or accepted symbol style. It therefore adds no meaning beyond what the bare input schema already provides.

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 the resource ('Company profile and fundamentals') and then enumerates the specific fields returned, with 'Returns' supplying the action. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_quote by directing price requests elsewhere.

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?

Provides an explicit alternative for current price ('use get_quote') and explains that this tool omits the live quote to stay focused. It does not cover when to choose it over other market-data siblings like get_market_snapshot, but the primary exclusion is clear.

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