search_companies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'search' without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or whether it is read-only. The agent cannot infer side effects or constraints.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states the tool's purpose, and the second provides a useful tip. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with essential 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?

Given the tool's complexity with 38 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief and does not explain return format, pagination, or combination rules. The tip is helpful but incomplete for a tool of this scale.

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 all 38 parameters described, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by advising the use of other tools to obtain valid filter codes, which helps the agent understand parameter values beyond 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 'Search B2B companies' with specific criteria (name, domain, location, industry, technology, headcount), differentiating it from sibling search tools focused on people, jobs, or news.

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 includes a tip to use get_locations, search_verticals, and search_technologies to find valid filter codes, guiding the agent on how to prepare inputs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_people.

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