List company admins

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation (listing is a read operation) and adds the word 'current' to suggest real-time data. However, it does not provide additional behavioral detail such as pagination, authorization requirements, or what 'admins' includes, leaving most transparency to 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?

The description is one short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 read-only list operation with an output schema present and a single obvious parameter, the description is largely complete. It could benefit from a note about what constitutes an 'admin' or any incidental limitations, but given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential context.

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 input schema has one required parameter (company_id) with 0% schema description coverage, yet the description does not mention what this parameter means or how to use it. The parameter name is self-explanatory to a degree, but the description fails to explicitly link it to the action, leaving the agent to infer from naming conventions.

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') and the resource ('current admins of the page'), which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'company_list_posts' or 'company_list_followers'. The verb+resource combination unambiguously differentiates its purpose.

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 usage ('use when you need to see page admins') but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any context about exclusions. It lacks the explicit 'when/when-not' that would earn a higher score.

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