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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and it does state 'Read-only' plus the data categories returned. This covers the most important behavioral trait for a get tool, though it does not discuss not-found behavior or response formatting.

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 two compact sentences, front-loaded with 'Full lead card' and a concise field list. The parenthetical clarifying source as 'why is this person here' adds meaningful context without unnecessary length.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description gives a useful summary of the returned lead-card sections and explicitly indicates safety. It could be more complete with error or missing-record behavior, but it is adequate for this level of complexity.

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% and the description never explains the `id` parameter, its format, or its relationship to the CRM lead. The schema's required `id` is self-explanatory by name, but the description adds no parameter meaning to compensate for the missing schema-level descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving one CRM lead with full detail, and lists the exact sections returned (identity, source, company enrichment, activities, comments, assignments). The 'Read-only' qualifier and 'full detail' wording help distinguish it from list, update, and delete siblings.

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 phrase 'Full lead card' implies this is the single-lead detail getter, contrasting with list-style tools like crm_list_leads, and 'Read-only' signals it is not a mutation tool. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use it instead of alternatives or when not to use it, so the guidance remains implicit.

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