Enrich Company Firmographics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by explaining the data extraction method (schema.org JSON-LD and HTML meta tags) and output structure (source_signals array, data_completeness score), which go beyond the annotations.

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 relatively concise, with the main purpose front-loaded. It includes necessary details about output format and batch processing without excessive length.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and sibling tools, the description covers input, output structure, extraction method, batching, caching, credit consumption, and token requirement. It is complete for the agent to understand usage.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add much for most params, but it does clarify the default cache duration (7 days) for skipCache. Baseline 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 'enrich' and the resource 'company domain' and lists the specific firmographics fields (employee band, industry, HQ, etc.). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'resolve_company_identity' or 'get_company_changes', though the output fields are 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 mentions the tool is read-only and requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes credits, but provides no guidance on when to use this vs. siblings or what prerequisites (beyond token) are needed.

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