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

The description states 'Read-only, free,' which adds some behavioral context beyond the input schema (which has no annotations). However, it doesn't disclose details like what the output format is, whether it returns full member profiles or just IDs, or any rate limits. The 'free' claim is useful but not fully transparent about the returned data.

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 short sentences, each earning its place: what it lists, when to use it, and its read-only no-cost nature. Extremely efficient and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description is nearly complete. The main missing piece is the output shape — the agent knows it gets valid owner IDs but not whether the response includes names, emails, or other fields. Still, given the tool's simplicity, this is a minor gap.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The description's scoping phrase ('people in this workspace who can own a CRM lead') adds meaning about what the returned list contains, which compensates for the lack of any schema detail. Baseline 4 for zero-param tools is appropriate here.

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 clearly states a specific action (List) and resource (people in this workspace who can own a CRM lead), which immediately distinguishes it from the many sibling list tools like crm_list_leads or list_agents. The title is also clear and consistent with the description.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: 'Use before reassign_crm_lead to get valid owner ids.' This is direct usage guidance that links to a sibling tool and provides a concrete workflow context.

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