get_company

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It only restates the retrieval nature of the tool and does not mention read-only guarantees, error behavior, authentication needs, or what exactly the returned '詳細情報' contains.

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 a single short Japanese sentence with no filler words or redundant content. The verb and object are front-loaded, making it appropriately compact for a simple one-parameter getter.

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 simple one-parameter schema, the description is minimally viable for invoking the tool. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves room for ambiguity about response format and how this differs from the list-oriented sibling get_companies.

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 schema fully documents the sole parameter company_id with the description 事業所ID and 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds no additional meaning about the format, lookup semantics, or edge cases for the parameter.

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 uses the action verb 取得 and identifies the resource 事業所の詳細情報, making it clear the tool returns details for a single company. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling get_companies, though the singular/plural naming makes the distinction inferable.

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 is provided about when to use get_company versus get_companies or the other list-oriented sibling tools. The description lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or a typical call sequence, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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