get_company_profile

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses the read-only nature ('Look up'), lists the returned data fields, and explains the data source ('Populated by the Analyst agent's IP intelligence enrichment pipeline'). It adds context beyond the schema, though it lacks details on rate limits or error conditions.

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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, return fields, data source, and requirement. No wasted words.

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 description covers the return fields, data source, and usage requirement. With no output schema, the listing of returned fields is helpful. However, it omits details about pagination, errors, or timeout behavior, which are minor given the simplicity of a single-parameter lookup.

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 already provides a clear description for company_domain (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating the resource type, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the verb ('look up') and resource ('enriched firmographic profile for a company domain'), and lists the specific fields returned. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing solely on firmographic data from the enrichment pipeline.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires BigQuery mode'), which provides some usage guidance. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_account or get_company_sessions) nor when not to use it.

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