Get Funding and Press Signals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavioral details: data sources (Google News, PR wires), deduplication, output format (flat Clay-ready JSON), and prerequisites (APIFY_TOKEN, credits). No contradictions.

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 three sentences, each valuable: first sentence states purpose, second describes output, third lists constraints. No superfluous content, front-loaded with key info.

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 (2 params, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description covers all needed aspects: input, output, behavior, prerequisites, and cost. No gaps.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description further clarifies the 'company_name' parameter with a concrete example (Deel for deel.com), adding meaning beyond the schema.

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 scans Google News and PR wires for specific signal types (funding rounds, executive moves, etc.) at any company domain. It distinctly differentiates from siblings like 'scan_gtm_hiring_signals' by focusing on funding and press signals.

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 gives clear context for usage: read-only operation, required APIFY_TOKEN, and credit consumption. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use it, the context and sibling list imply appropriate scenarios.

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