get_company_risk_summary

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

Given no annotations, the description reveals important behavioral traits: it's a paid endpoint and returns an x402 challenge in default non-settling mode. However, it does not state whether it's read-only or destructive, nor any authentication or permissions needed.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the endpoint and key constraints. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter tool, it covers the paid/non-settling behavior but omits what a successful response contains. Since there is no output schema, the description should have described the return value (e.g., risk summary fields).

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 a clear description for the sole parameter 'id'. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it's a thin wrapper for a specific GET endpoint, and the tool name implies 'risk summary'. It somewhat distinguishes from siblings by mentioning the endpoint, but could be more explicit about what intelligence data is returned.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_company_context or inspect_x402_challenge. It only mentions it's a paid endpoint, but doesn't help the agent decide.

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