Get company configuration lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that it returns configuration lists and hints at VAT type usage in items_list, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or error behavior. Given the annotation, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and enumerates the available lists. There is no redundant or filler content; every word earns its place.

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 simple (2 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema) and the description covers what it does, what data it returns, and the use case. The schema fully documents parameters, and readOnlyHint covers the safety aspect. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by noting 'VAT types (IDs for items_list)', linking the resource enum to document building. This enhances understanding of what the returned data will be used for.

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 a specific action ('Look up company configuration') and resource ('needed to build documents'). It enumerates the actual configuration lists (VAT types, payment methods, payment accounts, expense categories), making its purpose distinct from sibling document CRUD tools and list_companies.

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 phrase 'needed to build documents' provides clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context sufficiently implies when this tool is appropriate relative to sibling document-related tools.

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