Set company profile

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotent, non-destructive, not read-only), the description adds the session-scoping detail ('for this session') and the downstream dependency on other tools. This clarifies that the tool is a stateful setter, though it does not mention the effect on previously stored profile values.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and parameters, and the second explains why the profile matters to other tools, making every word valuable.

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?

The description covers the essential aspects for a state-setting tool: what it stores, the session scope, and its impact on sibling tools. Combined with the idempotency and non-destructive annotations, the agent has sufficient context to invoke it correctly without needing an output schema.

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 schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all four parameters, including an enum for riskTolerance. The description merely lists the parameter names (using 'headcount' for companySize) without adding additional meaning beyond the schema, so it stays at the baseline 3.

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 'Store' and the resource 'company context' with specific fields (industry, headcount, jurisdiction, risk tolerance). It also explicitly notes that every other Contract Sentinel tool reads this profile, which distinguishes it from the sibling tools and establishes its role as a session-level setup.

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 the tool should be used before other Contract Sentinel tools, since those tools read the profile when scoring contracts. It provides clear context for when to use it, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance or named alternatives.

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