get_company_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses behavioral traits: no raw IP storage, /24 prefix resolution, and BigQuery requirement. It also lists returned fields. Missing details like pagination or rate limits, but the key constraints are covered.

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?

Three well-structured sentences: first states purpose and output, second lists included fields, third adds important constraints. No filler; every sentence adds value.

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 return fields, IP handling, and a prerequisite. Without an output schema, it adequately explains what sessions contain. However, missing default lookback, pagination, or ordering could hinder usage in complex scenarios.

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 50% (only company_domain documented). The description adds no specific meaning for lookback_days (e.g., default, range) and repeats the domain concept without enhancing it. More detail is needed to compensate for the schema gap.

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 returns de-anonymized web sessions for a specific company, listing included fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_website_data_capture, which might have overlapping functionality.

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 implies usage for querying sessions by company domain over a lookback window and notes a prerequisite (BigQuery mode), but offers no guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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