Export a company (legacy singular form)

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not describe side effects, what the export triggers (e.g., background job), or auth requirements beyond what is already in the text.

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 short (two sentences), which is concise but lacks crucial information about parameters and usage. It is not well-structured for a tool with a complex input schema.

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's complexity (many nested parameters, output schema present but not described), the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover what the export includes, how to configure it, or what the response looks like.

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 description does not explain any of the input schema parameters, which have zero documentation. With schema coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the agent to guess from property names only.

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 'Export a company' and identifies the tool as a legacy legacy singular form, distinguishing it from the plural version. However, it does not explain what the export produces or the format.

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 it is legacy via the title, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs the plural form (pc_post_companies_by_company_id_exports) or any other alternative. No exclusions or context are given.

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