list_companies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility. It notes pagination support but does not disclose read-only behavior, response shape, rate limits, or any caveats about 'all' (e.g., whether it includes archived companies).

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 entire description is one sentence, with no filler. Every word contributes to the core purpose.

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 list operation, the description covers the essential function and pagination, but with no output schema and no annotations, it omits return format, any default ordering, and potential limitations, making it only minimally adequate.

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?

The schema provides only parameter names and defaults (page=1, per_page=30) with 0% description coverage. The description mentions pagination support but does not explain semantics like page starting at 1 or limits on per_page, leaving agents without sufficient guidance.

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 action (List), resource (companies in Freshdesk), and scope (all) with pagination. It is unambiguous and distinct from siblings like view_company or search_companies, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving the full set of companies, but offers no guidance on when to prefer this over search_companies or view_company, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied rather than explicitly directed.

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