Get sidebar badge counts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the description adds limited behavioral context beyond the endpoint and authorization class. This is adequate but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like return value structure or pagination.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences plus a line break. It front-loads the purpose and includes the HTTP endpoint and authorization class without any fluff. Every sentence is informative.

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 is simple (read badge counts by company ID) and has an output schema (assumed to define return values), the description is fairly complete. It includes the endpoint and auth class, though it lacks explanation of what sidebar badges are or the output structure. Still, it is sufficient for a straightforward read operation.

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 input schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not explain the single parameter (companyId). It does not clarify what companyId represents, its format, or how it relates to the operation, leaving the parameter semantics entirely to the schema, which lacks 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?

The title and description clearly state 'Get sidebar badge counts', which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like pc_get_sidebar_preferences_me or other company-specific tools, leaving the purpose slightly ambiguous in context.

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 provides the HTTP method and authorization class but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or which scenarios it is designed for.

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