batch_enrich_companies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses concurrency, parallelism, and sub-second performance, but it does not mention failure behavior, partial results, rate limits, or what the enrichment returns. Some transparency is present, but not full.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core capability and limit are front-loaded, and the use-case sentence 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?

For a one-parameter batch tool, the description covers the action, limit, concurrency, and intended use case. It is slightly incomplete because it does not describe the output or explicitly route single-domain requests to enrich_company, but the schema covers invocation.

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% and the only parameter, 'domains', is already described as an array of up to 50 apex domains. The description adds the 'company' qualifier and concurrency context, but does not materially extend parameter semantics beyond 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 states a specific action ('Enriches'), a precise resource ('company domains'), and a clear scope ('up to 50', 'concurrently in parallel'). The 'batch' prefix and domain scope distinguish it from siblings like enrich_company and detect_technology without needing to open the schema.

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?

It gives a clear usage context: 'Highly efficient for lead qualification waterfalls.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the batch-vs-single distinction from enrich_company is strongly implied by 'up to 50' and 'batch'.

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