snipeit_gen_companiesidFetch the details of a specific Snipe-IT company by its ID. Use it to retrieve company information for asset management, reporting, or integration workflows.
GET /companies/{id}: Retrieve the specific details of a company by id. Generated from Snipe-IT OpenAPI operation companiesid.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | company id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description merely restates that this is a GET/retrieve operation and adds no permissions, rate-limit, return-shape, or error-behavior context.
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 useful information is front-loaded in one clear sentence. The second sentence is generated provenance boilerplate that does not help an agent invoke the tool, but the description remains short overall.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read tool with complete schema coverage and rich safety annotations, the description is adequate. It does not describe the returned company fields, but no output schema exists and the operation is straightforward.
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%, and the id parameter is already documented as 'company id'. The description only says 'by id' and adds no format, range, or lookup semantics 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 states a clear verb and resource: retrieve the specific details of a company by id. This distinguishes it from list-style siblings like snipeit_gen_companies, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or the duplicate companiesid variants.
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 phrase 'by id' implies the tool should be used when a company id is known, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to list/raw-request alternatives. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.