list_company_fields

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the burden. It honestly states this is a list (read-only) operation with scope 'all', but provides no additional behavioral context such as return format, pagination, or whether it includes only custom fields. For a simple zero-parameter list tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word adds meaning: action, resource, scope, and context.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what will happen. It could benefit from specifying the return structure, but 'list all company fields' is reasonably complete for a list operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is already complete. The description correctly adds no parameter information; the default baseline of 4 applies.

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 action (list), the resource (company fields), and the scope (all) within Freshdesk. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_companies and list_contact_fields by specifying 'company fields'.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description only states what the tool does, not when to use it over alternatives such as list_contact_fields or get_ticket_fields, nor any context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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