company_select

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only says 'select' and 'active company.' It doesn't disclose persistence, authentication requirements, whether the previous active company is overwritten, or what side effects this selection has on other tools. This is inadequate for a state-changing tool.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy. It communicates the operation and target resource directly.

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?

The tool is structurally simple with one documented parameter, so the description is not grossly incomplete. However, it lacks context about how the active company is used by other tools and how to obtain a valid companyId. This is a notable gap for an agent trying to decide when to call 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?

The schema fully documents the single parameter `companyId` with 100% coverage, so the description adds no parameter detail. It also doesn't explain where the ID comes from or any validation constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the necessary work.

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 a clear verb ('select') and resource ('company'), and adds the important effect: the company becomes the active company. This distinguishes it from company_list, but it doesn't explicitly name siblings or elaborate on what 'active' means.

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 gives no guidance on when to call this tool relative to siblings like company_list or process_*. It implies a state change but never states that selection is a prerequisite for subsequent operations or that company IDs should come from company_list.

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