housecallpro_get_company

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no read-only disclosure is needed. The description adds useful context with the returned fields and input source, but does not go into behavior such as missing-company handling, errors, or response shape.

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 short sentences with no redundant wording. The action and key return fields are front-loaded, and the input instruction is a single clear follow-up.

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 simple one-parameter, read-only lookup, the description is complete: it specifies the input origin, the output fields, and the purpose. No output schema or nested-object complexity means there is little additional context an agent needs.

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 description coverage is 100% and already states the organization_id is an Organization UUID from an estimate. The description's 'Takes the organization_id from an estimate' essentially repeats that, so it adds little 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 uses a specific verb ('Look up') and a concrete resource (the contractor/company behind an estimate), and names the exact data returned. It is clearly differentiated from sibling tools like housecallpro_get_estimate because it targets the company rather than the estimate itself.

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 establishes the triggering context: use it when you have an estimate and need contractor details, taking organization_id from that estimate. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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