Get Company Lists

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

The description explains the return format with a JSON example, pagination parameters, and the common scenario of an empty array. Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc., so the description adds context without contradictions.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections for parameters, return format, notes, use cases, and next steps. It is concise without unnecessary information, and each part serves a purpose.

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?

Despite the absence of an output schema, the description includes a detailed JSON return example, covering all fields. It also provides use cases and next steps, making it complete for a read-only list retrieval tool.

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 100%, but the description adds value by explaining the source of companyId (get from affinity_search_companies or affinity_get_company) and default/max for limit. However, the description omits the responseFormat parameter, which is only in 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 'Get all lists where a specific company appears.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like affinity_get_company_list_entries or affinity_get_list by focusing on lists containing a specific company.

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?

The description provides context for usage, such as 'Useful for discovering which deal pipelines track a specific company.' It also includes a note about empty returns and suggests next steps like using affinity_get_company_list_entries, but it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or list alternatives.

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