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

Annotations indicate a read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: partial match search, empty search returns all, and returned metadata includes Sieve scores. This enriches the agent's understanding without contradicting the 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 concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and each sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and clearly separates the main description from parameter details, making it easy to scan.

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 listing tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, parameters, and key behaviors. Minor gaps like pagination order or empty-result handling are not critical given the annotations and simplicity.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: search is a partial company name match with empty returning all, and limit is capped at 1-100 with a default of 20. This adds meaningful constraints and behavior beyond the raw 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 opens with 'List deals in your Sieve pipeline,' which clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (deals). It further specifies search options and return content, distinguishing it from siblings like sieve_screen (screening) or sieve_results (results).

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 explains when to use the tool: to search by company name or list all deals. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear. Sibling tools are listed separately, and the description implies this is the go-to for deal listing.

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