teamleader_untag_company

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutation ('Remove') but does not disclose idempotency, behavior when tags do not exist, permission requirements, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

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, clear sentence that is appropriately front-loaded with the core action. It is concise and to the point, with no extraneous content. While it is minimal, it effectively communicates the essential purpose.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic action. However, it lacks behavioral details such as error handling, idempotency, or confirmation of what is returned. Given the absence of annotations, a bit more context would improve completeness, but the description is adequate for a straightforward remove 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the parameter names and brief schema descriptions. It does not compensate for any potential ambiguity, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given full coverage.

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 verb 'Remove' and the object 'one or more tags from a company'. It is specific about the resource (company) and the action (removing tags), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like teamleader_tag_company (add) and teamleader_untag_contact (different resource).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about scenarios where this tool is preferred. The description simply states the action without any usage direction.

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