List routines in a company

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value with 'Authorization class: board_or_agent' and the HTTP method/path. However, it does not disclose pagination, filtering, or ordering behavior. For a list operation with openWorldHint=true, more detail would be helpful.

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 very concise with two short lines and no fluff. It front-loads the purpose. However, it sacrifices completeness by omitting parameter details and usage guidance. Could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 has 1 parameter and an output schema, the description provides the basic purpose and endpoint but lacks parameter semantics and usage context. It is minimally complete but relies on the agent inferring details from the name and 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'companyId' parameter or its format. The endpoint path implies it, but no explicit semantics are provided. This is a critical gap for a required parameter.

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 routines in a company', which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like pc_get_routines_by_id (single routine) and pc_post_companies_by_company_id_routines (create routine). The HTTP method and path further reinforce the purpose.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this tool lists all routines for a company, while other tools handle specific routines or creation. The description lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios.

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