List companies

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds that pagination and filters are supported, which is useful, but it does not clarify default pagination behavior, filter semantics, or return format. The added behavioral detail is minimal beyond the annotations.

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, terse sentence that conveys the core function with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, making it an efficient pointer to the tool's purpose.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain how pagination works, what filters are available, what fields are returned, or any defaults. An agent would have significant unknowns after reading this description.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the 8 parameters. It only vaguely mentions 'pagination and filters' without defining specific parameters like 'page', 'limit', 'query', 'with', or 'order_updated_at'. This leaves agents guessing at parameter meanings.

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 (list), the resource (companies), and the scope (with pagination and filters). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kommo_companies_get by explicitly indicating a list operation rather than a single-entity fetch.

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 implies when to use the tool (when a paginated or filtered list of companies is needed) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as getting a single company. There is no mention of when not to use it or which other tools to prefer in specific scenarios.

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