b2b_company_dossier

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds a cost ($0.10 USDC) and lists components but doesn't disclose rate limits, auth requirements, or output format beyond the high-level composition.

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, efficiently packed sentence that front-loads the core value proposition and lists components. It avoids unnecessary fluff, though the cost mention could be seen as slightly extraneous.

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 (4-in-1 aggregation) and lack of an output schema, the description is minimal. It lists components but doesn't explain how results are structured or what an agent should expect to receive, leaving gaps for a tool that combines multiple data sources.

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%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter details (e.g., format expectations or constraints for domain, company, location) beyond what the schema provides.

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 what the tool does: a 4-in-1 dossier combining DNS/MX/SaaS tech stack, website extraction, local business contacts, and social mentions. It distinguishes itself from siblings like domain_intel or web_extract by bundling these capabilities, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as domain_intel, web_extract, or social_search. It implies usage for B2B sales intelligence but lacks explicit conditions or exclusions.

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