list_companies

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

The description mentions cursor pagination, the HTTP GET method, and a tier 'readonly-owner', indicating a safe read operation. However, it contradicts itself by including create requirements, which is misleading. Without annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits consistently.

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 short but includes irrelevant create information that wastes space. It is not concise; every sentence should serve the tool's purpose, and the create sentence is unnecessary and confusing.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining return values and how to use the tool. It mentions pagination but omits details on response format. The contradictory create info further reduces completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its 3 parameters, fully describing them. The description adds a note about 'cursor-paginated' which relates to the 'after' parameter, but otherwise adds little beyond 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 'List a company record,' indicating the primary purpose. However, it immediately follows with create requirements ('At least one of name or domain is required on create'), which is irrelevant and potentially misleading for a list tool, reducing clarity.

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 provide guidance on when to use this list tool over its sibling 'get_company'. It mentions cursor pagination, implying it's for listing multiple records, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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