conduyt_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 behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the embedded-resource caps (100 contacts, 50 deals) and that deal value is aggregated, which is genuine behavioral context. However, it does not say what happens on truncation, whether a missing ID errors or returns empty, or whether any permission is required.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and scope come first, followed by the response contents. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description does the important work of enumerating what is returned and its size limits, which is enough for a simple single-resource getter. It stops short of noting error behavior or permissions, but the core retrieval contract is covered.

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?

There is a single required parameter, fully documented in the schema as a company UUID at 100% coverage. The description adds nothing beyond that (e.g., that the UUID comes from conduyt_list_companies or a search result), so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single company') and immediately scopes the response shape: contacts, deals, and aggregated deal value. The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from conduyt_list_companies, and the enumerated expansions tell an agent exactly what payload to expect.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it needs one company's full detail rather than a list. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over conduyt_list_companies or conduyt_search, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., needing a known UUID).

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