get_company_overview

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses an important behavioral trait: it downloads and parses the entire year, and the first call can be slow. That latency warning is exactly the kind of context an agent needs before invoking. It does not say whether results are cached afterward, but this is a solid addition over 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose followed by the cost warning; nothing is wasted. The parenthetical is slightly informal but functional.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a tool whose main value is deciding what to fetch next, the description omits how it relates to get_fre_table and whether the expensive download persists across calls.

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%, and the schema already documents both year and cd_cvm (including pointing to search_company for the code). The description only reinforces the company-year granularity, adding little semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 specific verb and resource: it shows which FRE tables contain data for one company-year, which refines the vague name 'get_company_overview'. It does not mention the closely related siblings list_fre_tables or get_fre_table, so an agent must infer the division of labor.

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?

Use as a discovery step before fetching a specific FRE table is only implied, not stated; there is no explicit 'use this when' or exclusion of get_fre_table/list_fre_tables. The one-year scope does hint at when the tool applies, but the agent must infer it.

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