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

The description goes beyond annotations by revealing idempotent behavior ('safe to repeat'), the promotion of lifeStage, and that it qualifies or creates a lead. Annotations are all false (no hints), so the description adds meaningful behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant phrases or unnecessary details.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters and a required accountId, the description covers the core workflow (lead qualification, deal linking, lifecycle promotion) and idempotency. It does not explain deal creation details or output shape, but output schema exists to cover that. Slight gap in parameter context, but overall sufficient for the tool's single purpose.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to accountId by explaining it triggers lead qualification, but does not elaborate on other parameters. Schema descriptions already handle parameter details, so no additional value beyond baseline.

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 it converts an account by qualifying its lead and linking a deal, which is a specific verb-resource action. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_deal' or 'update_account' by focusing on lead conversion and lifecycle promotion.

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 description notes it is safe to repeat (implying idempotent usage) and works on already active accounts, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., create_deal vs convert_lead). This provides some context but lacks explicit when-not or alternative guidance.

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