acc_list_companies

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds contextual purpose (source of companyId) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, error cases, or data volume. The description does not contradict the annotation, and the added context is modest.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary action and purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 with a readOnlyHint annotation and an output schema present, the description captures the essential purpose and downstream use. It doesn't explain return format (handled by output schema) or pagination explicitly, but the schema defaults provide that. Overall, adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 only 50%, with account_id and name_contains described, while limit and offset are not. The description itself does not explain any parameter semantics; it only mentions companyId as an output. This fails to compensate for the schema gaps.

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 tool lists companies (partners) registered in the account, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling list tools (e.g., acc_list_hubs, acc_list_projects) by explaining its unique role as the source of companyId for member additions and COMPANY folder permissions.

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 when to use the tool: when a companyId is needed for adding members or granting COMPANY folder permissions. This provides context for selection among siblings, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or specify when not to use it.

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