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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds the operational prerequisite chain and the default Close field-mapping behavior (name, website, address, contact, phone, email) that determines readiness. The field-mapping sentence leans toward explaining export_leads rather than this tool, which slightly dilutes focus, but it does help interpret what "ready" means.

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?

Three sentences, each doing distinct work: what is returned, when to call it and why, and the caveat that file exports bypass the check. The prerequisite warning is front-loaded before the edge-case detail.

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 no parameters, a documented output schema, and full annotation coverage, the remaining burden is explaining call timing and failure conditions — both are covered explicitly. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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?

Zero-parameter tool, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The absence of arguments is implicitly conveyed by the description scoping everything to "this account".

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 resource (connected export destinations) and scope (Close, GoHighLevel, Google Sheets) plus what is reported for each (whether it is ready to receive leads). This is far more specific than the title and cannot be confused with any sibling tool, which all deal with searches, leads, or automations rather than connection state.

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?

Gives explicit timing ("Check this BEFORE export_leads or create_automation with a CRM destination") and names the exact failure mode those calls hit. It also states the exclusion — file destinations need nothing connected — so the agent knows when to skip the call entirely.

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