get_industry_top_growth_companies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions input and return type, but does not disclose how 'growth' is defined, whether results are sorted, any caching behavior, rate limits, or error conditions. Minimal behavioral insight.

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 short and well-structured with Args/Returns sections. It avoids unnecessary details, but the type information is redundant with the schema. Still, it is efficient and readable.

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 output schema exists (though not provided in input) and many similar siblings, the description lacks context on what defines 'top growth', how to find valid industry names (e.g., via get_all_industries), and any limitations. With no annotations, completeness is low.

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 parameter 'industry' has 0% schema description coverage. The description only repeats the type and says 'The name of the industry', adding no additional meaning such as valid values, case sensitivity, or how to obtain industry names. Fails to compensate for schema gap.

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 'Retrieve a list' and the resource 'top growth companies' with scope 'within a specific industry'. It differentiates from siblings like get_industry_top_companies and get_industry_top_performing_companies by specifying 'growth'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_industry_top_companies or get_industry_top_performing_companies. The description lacks context on the differences between 'top growth', 'top', and 'top performing'.

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