get-company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the tool's function ('Get full details') without addressing the optional fields parameter, return format, error handling, or side effects. The phrase 'full details' could be misleading when a subset of fields is requested.

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 of nine words, front-loaded with the action and target. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or irrelevant content.

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 get-by-ID tool, the description covers the primary purpose but omits the selective fields parameter and any details about response behavior or non-existent IDs. It is minimally adequate but lacks depth for edge cases, especially given there is no output schema.

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% with both parameters described in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how 'fields' works or the default behavior.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with resource 'company' and scope 'single company by ID', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list-companies (listing) and find-company (searching). It concisely states what the tool does and its unique target.

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 when a specific company ID is known ('by ID'), providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear among siblings.

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