Resolve Company Identity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds significant behavioral context: cross-checking inputs, resolving missing ones, flagging conflicts, returning confidence scores and match method, and mentioning Apify credit consumption. 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?

Three efficient sentences: first defines core function and output, second explains behavioral details, third covers input requirements and side effects. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with most important information.

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 what the tool returns (canonical identity with confidence scores and match method), how it handles conflicts, and prerequisites (APIFY_TOKEN, credit consumption). Complete for a resolution tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the role of domain as 'strongest canonical key' and the purpose of skipCache. Overall parameter context is good but not groundbreaking beyond 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 verb 'resolve' and the resource 'company identity', specifying it handles any combination of name, domain, or LinkedIn URL. It distinguishes from sibling tools like resolve_linkedin_url by emphasizing it resolves multiple inputs and cross-checks them.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: provide at least one of the three inputs, mentions cross-checking and conflict flagging. Implies when to use (partial identity data) but doesn't explicitly list alternative tools for single-input resolution. Still clear and helpful.

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