linkedin_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes an 'Extract' operation, implying a read-only action, but does not mention potential issues like missing company pages, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The behavioral traits are insufficiently specified.

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 concise sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and provides all essential information in a compact form. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

The tool has one parameter (fully described) and no output schema or annotations. However, the description fails to specify what the tool returns (e.g., company details, profile data) or how the 'navigate first' alternative works. For a tool with these characteristics, more detail on outputs and usage flow is expected.

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 description coverage is 100% (the sole parameter has a description). The description adds context ('Provide company name or navigate first'), indicating the parameter is optional and can be omitted if navigation occurs first. This adds marginal value beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Extract' and the resource 'LinkedIn company page', making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like linkedin_profile (for people) and linkedin_feed (for feed), though not explicitly, but the context of company pages is sufficiently unique.

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 basic guidance ('Provide company name or navigate first'), implying two modes of use. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like linkedin_search or linkedin_profile, nor does it give exclusion criteria or prerequisites.

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