enrich_company

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: cost per match, no charge on failure, and the free_enrichment field to check. Also lists output fields, all consistent with readOnlyHint=true.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then identifier requirements and credit policy. No wasted words, each sentence adds useful information.

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?

Covers purpose, inputs, output fields, and cost. Lacks error handling details (e.g., what happens if multiple matches found), but given the annotations and simple parameter set, it is nearly complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by specifying parameter precedence (company_website most accurate) and explicitly stating that at least one identifier is needed, a constraint not present in the schema.

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 enriches a company by returning a full profile with specific data fields (headcount, industry, etc.). It differentiates from siblings like enrich_person and search_company by focusing on company enrichment with detailed output, and includes identifier requirements.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_company or enrich_person. While it mentions identifier preferences and credit costs, it lacks comparative context for tool selection.

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