Create a new deal in the Xmagnet pipeline.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| notes | No | ||
| title | Yes | Deal title | |
| value | No | Deal value in USD | |
| priority | No | ||
| company_name | No | ||
| contact_name | No | ||
| expected_close_date | No | Expected close date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With annotations declaring readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, the description correctly implies a mutating but non-destructive operation. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond that, such as permission requirements or 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?
A single clear sentence that states the action and destination without unnecessary words.
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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain what happens after creation, what fields are required beyond title, or how the pipeline context affects the operation, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.
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 coverage is only 43%, leaving notes, company_name, and contact_name undocumented. The description does not compensate by explaining these parameters or their purpose, so the agent must rely on incomplete 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 uses a specific verb ('create') and resource ('deal') and adds context ('in the Xmagnet pipeline'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_contact or create_campaign.
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 choose this tool over alternatives such as create_contact or create_campaign. The description only states the action without context on prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools occupy nearly identical roles (create_contact/add_contacts/save_contacts_to_crm/upload_contacts; add_companies/create_company; search_contacts/search_crm_contacts/find_contacts_at_companies), and the names don't clearly reveal whether they operate on saved or prospected data. Although the descriptions clarify some boundaries, an agent would frequently need to read many descriptions carefully to avoid mis-selection.
Most tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern such as list_campaigns, create_deal, and update_contact. Minor deviations like company_intelligence, get_icp, load_more_contacts, and the inconsistent use of add_/create_/upload_/save_ for similar creation actions keep it from being fully consistent.
51 tools is far beyond the well-scoped range and exceeds the 50+ extreme threshold. Even for a broad CRM/prospecting/marketing platform, exposing this many tools at once makes agent selection costly and unwieldy.
Contact and company creation/read/update are covered, but delete is absent across the board, and campaigns can be drafted, listed, and measured but not edited, activated, paused, or deleted. Deals, forms, and landing pages also lack update/delete lifecycle actions, creating meaningful dead ends for common CRM workflows.
