crm_search_companies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'search' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination (implied by 'after' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with no results. The description is too vague to provide meaningful context beyond the basic action.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool, though it could be more informative while remaining concise.

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?

Given the complexity (5 parameters with nested structures, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the search scope, result format, error conditions, or how parameters interact. For a search tool with rich filtering capabilities, this leaves too many gaps for effective agent use.

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 is 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'company-specific filters' which loosely relates to the filterGroups parameter but doesn't explain any of the 5 parameters (filterGroups, properties, limit, after, sorts) or their purposes. The description adds minimal value beyond what the schema structure implies.

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 states the tool searches companies with filters, which is a clear purpose but lacks specificity. It doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like crm_search_contacts or crm_search_leads, nor does it specify what 'company-specific filters' means beyond the generic term.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like crm_search_contacts and crm_search_leads, the description doesn't indicate if this is for company entities specifically or how it differs from general search tools like crm_search_objects.

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