teamleader_list_companies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'optional filtering and pagination' hints at the behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it is safe/destructive-free, describe the response format, or mention any rate limits or permissions. This is a minimal but not misleading description.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It starts with the core action ('List companies from Teamleader Focus') and then adds the qualifying 'optional filtering and pagination'. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 list tool with six optional parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but slightly lean. It correctly identifies the resource and the general capability, and the schema covers parameter details. However, it does not explicitly mention that the result is a paginated list of company objects, nor any caveats like result limits. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description only adds the generic phrase 'optional filtering and pagination', which does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema handles parameter semantics fully.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List companies from Teamleader Focus'. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_company (single company) and create/update/delete company operations. The phrase 'with optional filtering and pagination' further scopes the behavior, leaving no ambiguity about 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer list_companies over get_company, nor does it explain exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied by the name and description, not explicitly stated.

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