Preview company export

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, whether the preview creates temporary resources, or any rate limits or permissions beyond the authorization class.

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) but the first sentence simply repeats the title. It is concise but not efficient; the technical details in the second sentence are useful but minimal.

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 that an output schema exists but is not shown, the description does not explain what the preview returns. For a POST operation with side effects allowed (readOnlyHint=false), the description lacks completeness about the operation's behavior and response.

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 coverage is 50%; the body parameter has a helpful description noting optionality and lack of schema, but the required companyId in path has no description. The tool description does not add further semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Preview company export' and description repeat the purpose, but the description adds the HTTP method and path, which clarifies the resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like pc_post_companies_by_company_id_exports and pc_post_companies_import_preview, though no explicit comparison is made.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description states authorization class but does not provide context for when a preview is useful or when to choose the actual export or import preview.

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