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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context that it groups results by stage and returns ids intended for use by the other crm_ tools, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result size beyond the limit param.

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?

Front-loads the core action and compresses modes, searchable fields, and filters into roughly two dense sentences with little waste. The parenthetical and em-dash clause make it slightly heavy but nothing is redundant.

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 read-only list tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description covers modes, filters, defaults, and what identifiers are returned. It could be more complete about result ordering or pagination, but an agent has enough to call it 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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters (limit, query, stage, status, pipeline) are already documented including defaults and the enum. The description restates the searchable fields and the default-open status but adds no syntax, format, or interaction detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List deals (opportunities)') plus its scope: grouped by stage, either one pipeline's board or a cross-pipeline search. The plural/list nature clearly separates it from the singular crm_opportunity and from crm_pipelines.

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?

Describes two usage modes (single-pipeline board vs. cross-pipeline search) which implies when each applies, and the filter options are enumerated. However, it never names the sibling tools (crm_opportunity, crm_pipelines) or states when an agent should pick those instead, so the routing guidance is only implicit.

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