create_company

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces the non-idempotency with a concrete consequence (duplicates are not checked) that the boolean alone doesn't convey, and notes it returns the created company. It does not mention auth requirements or rate limits, so it stops short of full transparency.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the primary action stated first and the duplicate-lookup caveat immediately after. Every sentence carries actionable information.

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 create tool with no output schema, the description covers the side effects, the pre-call check, the return value, and the sibling alternative. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

There is exactly one parameter, and the schema documents it fully at 100% coverage with a concrete example, so the baseline is 4. The description's "name only" confirms the single-field shape but adds no syntax or validation detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a company record") and bounds the scope with "with a name only." It is distinguishable from create_lead_complex and list_companies without opening either 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: look with list_companies first because duplicates are not checked, and names an alternative (create_lead_complex) with the condition that selects it. Both the exclusion and the alternative are stated.

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