get_company_by_uid

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only implies a read operation without stating side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. It does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic action, leaving agents uninformed about potential exceptions or costs.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core function and optional enrichment, achieving front-loaded clarity without redundancy.

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 get tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not specify what fields are returned, handle edge cases, or differentiate sufficiently from similar tools, leaving some gaps for an agent's decision-making.

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%, and the tool description does not add any meaning beyond what is already in the parameter descriptions. Baseline score of 3 applies as the schema suffices.

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 action ('Get'), resource ('detailed company information'), and source ('from Zefix by UID'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning optional UID Webservice enrichment, providing a unique scope.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_company_details_uid or validate_uid. The description implies use when a UID is available, but lacks exclusion criteria or context for choosing among sibling tools.

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