SmartProspect: list industries

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds critical context: no credit consumption, no contact exposure, and the exact endpoint. These are meaningful beyond the structured fields, fully disclosing side effects.

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 three compact sentences, each carrying substantive value: purpose, safety profile, and reference-only nature. No fluff or redundant phrasing.

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?

With an output schema present, the tool's return value is fully documented. The description covers purpose, safety, endpoint, and usage context, making it complete for this simple read-only list 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 provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the description does not need to compensate. The baseline of 3 applies as the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning 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 description clearly states the tool's function: to list industry values used as SmartProspect search filters. It is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling list tools (e.g., countries, states, sub-industries).

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 indicates the tool's role as a reference for search filters and explicitly states it does not reveal contacts or consume credits, which helps set context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives such as list_sub_industries.

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