find_company_by_id

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

Without annotations, the description reveals the read-only nature ('Get'), lists typical return fields, and implies a lookup operation. It does not cover error behavior or data freshness, but for a simple read tool, the stated behavior is clear and sufficient.

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?

Single, compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose and lists key return fields. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 no output schema, the description provides useful return field names. It omits mention of optional parameters (kpp, branch_type) and their effect, but these are documented in the schema. For a simple lookup tool, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's capabilities.

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 each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond summarizing the query param as 'INN or OGRN'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance parameter semantics.

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 clearly states the action ('get detailed company info') and the specific identifiers (INN or OGRN), and lists the returned data (registration, status, CEO, address, OKVED). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_company_by_email or suggest_company.

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?

Implies use when you have an INN or OGRN, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives (e.g., other find_company variants) or provide exclusions (e.g., when to use suggest_company instead). No guidance on prerequisites or limitations.

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