List companies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that companies contain trackers and calls, but this is structural context, not behavioral. No additional traits like default sort, pagination limits, or authentication requirements are mentioned.

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 extremely concise, using only two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and adds one contextual sentence. Every word is necessary.

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?

Despite many parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks information about return format, typical usage patterns, or how to leverage the parameters effectively. An agent would need to infer pagination behavior and default values from the schema alone. This is insufficient for a tool with 7 optional parameters.

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%, so the input schema documents all 7 parameters clearly. The description does not add any further meaning beyond what the schema provides. For example, it doesn't explain how 'search' works or how 'status' filters companies. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema 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 'List companies in an account' with the specific verb 'List' and resource 'companies'. It adds context by noting that companies contain trackers and calls, which helps distinguish from sibling list tools that list trackers or calls directly. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools by specifying scope or usage context.

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 alternatives like list_trackers or get_company. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or recommended filtering criteria. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and parameters.

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