List listed companies (Bolagsanalys)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description reinforces read-only behavior and adds new context: 'Reference data shared across all tenants' and 'never writes or ingests.' It also explains the chaining behavior (use result in get_data). No contradiction; adds useful context beyond 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with 'Read-only.' Each sentence earns its place: safety, purpose, flow, example, shared-data note. No wasted words or repetition of schema fields.

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?

For a simple search tool with 5 optional params and an output schema, the description covers safety, search criteria, return value, and downstream usage. It is complete enough for an agent to know when and how to invoke it correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example ('nameContains 'Volvo', countryCode 'SE'') and explains that the companyId result is intended for use in bolagsanalys_get_data, providing practical usage semantics beyond the schema's per-parameter descriptions.

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?

Description states specific action: search Sedis's catalog of listed companies by name fragment or country code, returning companyId and name. It distinguishes from sibling bolagsanalys_get_data by positioning as the first step, and mentions the next tool to use.

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?

Explicitly says this is the FIRST step of the Bolagsanalys flow and to pass the returned companyId to bolagsanalys_get_data. Clear context for when to use, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like bolagsanalys_search_data or fastighetsbenchmark tools, the flow guidance is strong.

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