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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and usefully discloses that the secret is never echoed back and that the tool returns a redirect_uri to paste into Kommo. It does not cover overwrite behavior, validation failures, or permission requirements, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the step and required credentials, then the important secrecy behavior and return value. No sentence is wasted.

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?

The description explains the purpose, return value, secrecy behavior, and next step even though there is no output schema. Minor operational details such as overwrite semantics and error conditions are omitted, but the essential context for invoking the tool is present.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description adds useful context that these belong to the Vendo app created in the client's Kommo account, but it does not add format or validation details beyond the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: storing Kommo Integration ID and Secret key credentials. It also distinguishes this as step 1 of a two-step Kommo integration flow, making the boundary with connect_crm_integration clear.

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?

It explicitly states the sequencing: use this first to store credentials, then call connect_crm_integration with provider=kommo. The next action and condition are directly provided.

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