lookup_company_linkedin

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only describes the action and input, omitting traits like being a read-only operation, error handling for invalid URLs, or what data is returned. For a lookup tool, the read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the key action and input. It avoids unnecessary words, though the phrase 'using the dedicated LinkedIn lookup endpoint' is somewhat redundant but clarifies the specific endpoint.

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?

Given low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate but lacks details on return values or limitations. For an agent to fully understand the tool's place among siblings, additional context would be beneficial.

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 100% with 'linkedin_url' described as 'Company LinkedIn URL'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'look up a company' via the specific input 'LinkedIn URL' and mentions the 'dedicated LinkedIn lookup endpoint', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'lookup_company' (which may use other identifiers) and 'lookup_person_linkedin'.

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 guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., lookup_company, search_companies). It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., must have LinkedIn URL) or scenarios where it is not appropriate.

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