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

The description discloses idempotent behavior ('Safe to repeat — a second call lands on the same lead and deal') and lifeStage promotion. However, this directly contradicts the annotations' idempotentHint: false, which suggests the tool is not idempotent. Per instruction, this contradiction earns a score of 1.

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?

Four sentences that cover purpose, side effects, idempotency, and preconditions. It is front-loaded with the primary verb phrase. Slightly redundant 'Works on accounts that are already active' but overall compact.

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 mutation tool with 7 parameters and an output schema, the description explains the core workflow, lifecycle promotion, repeat behavior, and the active-account precondition. It does not explain return values or edge cases, but the output schema compensates. The idempotency contradiction is a minor gap, but the description is still fairly complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including enum details and a deprecated flag. The description does not add substantive parameter semantics beyond the schema, so 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?

The description clearly states that convert_lead qualifies an account's open lead (creating one if needed) and links exactly one pipeline deal. This is a specific verb+resource and differentiates it from sibling tools like create_deal or update_account.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: converting an account with an open lead and linking a deal. It mentions it works on already active accounts and is safe to repeat. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, like 'use create_deal if you only want a deal without account conversion.'

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