bc_list_companies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool internally opens the Companies system page, reads entries, and closes it, and explicitly states it does not affect current open pages or session state. This is thorough behavioral disclosure.

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 compact, with only three sentences plus a brief exclusionary note. Every sentence provides necessary value: purpose, usage guidance, behavioral transparency, and parameter clarity.

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 tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers its purpose, return value, side effects, and relationship to sibling tools. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% with zero properties. The description explicitly notes 'No parameters are required,' which is sufficient given there are no parameters to explain.

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 tool lists all companies in the Business Central environment and returns an array of company names plus the active company. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool bc_switch_company, which is for switching rather than listing.

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?

Explicitly says to use before bc_switch_company to verify existence, and warns not to use it if the company name is already known, directing to bc_switch_company directly. It also offers guidance for subsequent actions like bc_switch_company followed by bc_open_page.

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