get_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action without mentioning authentication requirements, read-only nature, potential errors, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a tool that interacts with LinkedIn.

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 with no redundant text. It is efficient and front-loaded, but it is so brief that it omits helpful details, though that is more a completeness issue than a conciseness issue.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits essential context: what constitutes 'company details', whether authentication is required, expected response format, and error handling. Since there is no output schema, the description should at least outline the returned data. The lack of this information makes it incomplete.

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% with both parameters clearly described in the input schema. The description's 'by URL' adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's description of company_url, and it does not explain the role of profile_id. The schema already handles parameter documentation, resulting in a baseline score.

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 'Get' with resource 'LinkedIn company details' and specifies the input method 'by URL', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_profile and get_post. It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites such as an active session or cookies, and no exclusions. It simply restates the function without usage context.

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