autotask_get_company_site_configuration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It does not mention idempotency, authorization requirements, pagination, or response size. The description only states the purpose and usage sequence, leaving significant behavioral unknowns for a read operation.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action and resource, then providing context. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description explains the concept of site configurations and the recommended workflow. However, it does not describe the return format or any edge cases, which would be helpful for an agent. Adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the single parameter 'companyId'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is already clear. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get the site configuration record(s) for a company in Autotask.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('site configuration for a company'). It also implicitly distinguishes from its sibling 'autotask_update_company_site_configuration' by recommending this tool for discovery before updates.

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 explicitly advises: 'Call this first to discover which fields are available before calling autotask_update_company_site_configuration.' This provides clear context and a recommended usage sequence. It does not enumerate when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent.

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