ghl_company_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, and the description adds details about authentication requirements, endpoint, and OAuth scopes, which go beyond the structured data. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 short but contains redundancy ('Get Company' repeated twice with a typo). It could be tightened by removing the duplicate phrase while retaining essential info (endpoint, security, scopes).

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?

For a simple GET by ID, the description provides the endpoint and authentication details. However, it lacks any information about the response structure or what fields are returned. Given no output schema, this is a noticeable omission.

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 only parameter, companyId, is mentioned in the endpoint but not described in the input schema or description. Context shows 0% schema coverage, so the description should explain what companyId is. It only provides an example, which is insufficient.

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 indicates the action ('Get Company') and resource (company), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle other entities like contacts, invoices, etc. However, the purpose is only stated via the endpoint and a repeated phrase, not elaborated.

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?

It explicitly states the requirement for an agency-level token and OAuth scopes, which helps in understanding prerequisites. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this vs. other tools or when not to use it.

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