boond_companies_get

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 only states the basic operation without any information about permissions, error handling, response format, or what happens if the ID is not found. An agent cannot anticipate any side effects, data returned, or failure modes.

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, short sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though it is arguably under-specified. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the operation but lacks the depth that could make it more useful.

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 lack of an output schema, annotations, and a rich sibling set, the description is severely incomplete. It does not mention what fields are returned, any prerequisites (e.g., having the ID from a search), or any edge cases. An agent cannot fully judge when to use this tool or what to expect from it.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage for the 'id' parameter, and the description does not compensate. It does not explain what the ID represents, how to obtain it, or any format constraints beyond the schema's basic string and minLength. The description adds no semantic value over the schema.

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 'Get' and the resource 'a company by ID', which distinguishes it from search, create, and update siblings. It is specific enough that an agent knows it retrieves a single company record by its identifier, though it does not explicitly mention that it returns a single object or that the ID is the company's unique key.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools, particularly boond_companies_search. It does not mention that this tool should be used when the company ID is already known, or that search should be used to find IDs first. The usage context is entirely implied by the tool name.

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