enrich_company_lookup

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond it: the lookup returns a professional network URL and costs 2 credits. It does not describe edge cases like not-found results or the exact effect of the enrich_profile parameter, but overall it is transparent enough.

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 just two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and output, followed by the essential input prerequisite and cost. There is no filler or redundant 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 simple lookup tool with rich parameter schema and readOnly annotation, the description covers the main output, the input prerequisites, and cost. It could still explain optional enrich_profile behavior or fallbacks when the company is not found, but the overall context is adequate for selection and invocation.

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 is 100% and each parameter already has a provided explanation. The description adds an important condition not encoded in the schema: at least one of company_name or company_domain must be provided. This genuinely helps an agent choose the right parameter combination.

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 states a specific action ('Look up a company'), identifies the required input type ('by name or domain'), and states the expected output ('professional network URL'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like enrich_company_search or enrich_company_profile.

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 a clear condition for the call ('Provide at least one of company_name or company_domain') and notes the cost. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as enrich_company_id_lookup or enrich_company_search, so usage context is mostly implied.

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