enrich_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'uses credits' to indicate cost, but does not clarify if the tool modifies data or only retrieves, nor does it address authentication, rate limits, or error states.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first covers purpose and credits, the second specifies input requirements. No redundant information, and each sentence adds essential value.

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?

Without annotations or output schema, the description should provide more behavioral context. It lacks details about the return format, pagination, prerequisite conditions, and error handling. The mention of credits is helpful but insufficient for complete understanding.

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 already includes descriptions for each parameter (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly stating that only one identifier should be provided, which the schema does not enforce. This clarifies mutual exclusivity.

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 verb 'enrich' and resource 'company data', specifies the outputs (description, social links, funding), and distinguishes from sibling tools like lookup_company by implying it provides more complete data. The mention of credits adds context.

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 explicitly states that one of three identifiers must be provided, giving clear input constraints. However, it does not compare with sibling tools like enrich_person or lookup_company to guide selection, nor does it mention when to avoid usage.

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