Get a company detail (contacts, deals, activities, tasks)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing safety. The description adds value by detailing the returned data (contacts, deals, activities, tasks) beyond the schema. No contradictory or missing behavioral details.

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 sentences: the first efficiently states the tool's function, the second gives CRM context. No redundancy, though the second sentence is slightly verbose for the tool alone.

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 (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains what is returned. It covers the primary purpose and included sub-objects.

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% for the single parameter 'companyId' with description 'Company id'. The description does not add any additional meaning or format hints beyond what the schema provides.

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 the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'full detail of ONE company' including specific sub-resources (contacts, deals, activities, tasks). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like rootr_crm_list_companies or rootr_crm_get_contact.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like rootr_crm_get_contact or rootr_crm_list_deals. However, the scope is implied by listing all included related data, so usage context is somewhat clear.

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