Map Company Social Presence

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

The description expands significantly on annotations by detailing discovery methods (homepage links, web search, pattern guessing, validation), follower count extraction limitations (X URL-only, Instagram/Facebook best-effort), and caching behavior (7-day cache, skipCache parameter). This fully discloses behavior beyond readOnlyHint and idempotentHint.

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 paragraphs, front-loaded with the primary action and output. Every sentence provides value—no filler. It efficiently covers purpose, platforms, discovery, limitations, and requirements.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains the return format ('flat Clay-ready JSON with URLs and follower counts') and all key behaviors. It addresses all five parameters, cost, caching, and fallback logic, making it complete for an AI agent.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds operational context: company_name improves disambiguation, includeFollowerCounts affects cost, skipCache overrides cache. This enriches parameter semantics beyond the schema descriptions.

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 maps a company's social media presence across LinkedIn, X, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube, returning profile URLs and follower counts. It specifies the exact platforms and outputs, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 notes that the tool is read-only, requires an APIFY_TOKEN, and consumes credits. While no sibling tools are listed, it implicitly advises use for social presence mapping without alternatives. The caveats about X, Instagram, and Facebook counts provide usage context.

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