Find Leads

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Published contact details' is a useful hint that only publicly listed contact data is collected, but the description never mentions the significant default side effect (save=true appends to leads.csv), that results are deduplicated by domain, or anything about latency, external scraping calls, or failure modes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action and its output are stated immediately. It is tight, though arguably under-sized for a tool with a persistence default and four optional filters.

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?

An output schema exists and every parameter is documented, so return-shape and argument questions are answered elsewhere. The gap is behavioral: for a web-search/scrape tool that writes to a file by default, the description should say what the search actually does and what persistence means.

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% — query, region, target_leads, exclude_domains and save are all documented with examples and constraints. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb-plus-resource ('Find companies') and adds what is returned ('their published contact details'), which is more than a restatement of the name. It stops short of distinguishing the tool from siblings like scrape_company or list_leads, so an agent still has to infer that this is bulk discovery rather than single-page scraping or reading stored leads.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling tools, and no exclusions. An agent must reason from the verb 'find' alone that this is the discovery step and not the stored-lead listing or single-company scraping step.

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