teamleader_list_companies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'optional filtering and pagination', which is already visible in the schema. It does not clarify whether this is a safe read-only operation, how pagination behaves beyond schema defaults, or what the response structure will be—especially with no output schema present.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes value; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 straightforward read-only list tool, the description plus schema is nearly sufficient. It clearly names the resource and includes schema-defined filtering/pagination options. The absence of an output schema means return format isn't specified, but that's not the description's obligation. Minor gaps remain around default behavior (e.g., sorting) and safety profile, but overall it is reasonably complete.

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 has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. It adds only the generic phrase 'optional filtering and pagination', which adds no specific meaning beyond the schema's per-parameter definitions.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'companies from Teamleader Focus', making the tool's collection-oriented purpose obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'teamleader_get_company' (single company) and 'teamleader_list_contacts' (different resource).

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 implies usage for retrieving multiple companies with filtering and pagination, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_company or list_contacts. No exclusions or alternative references are provided, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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