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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description is free to add domain behavior — notably that a non-null memberId signals a converted lead, plus the underlying GET endpoint. It does not discuss pagination behavior or result ordering, but it contributes real semantics beyond the annotation.

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?

Two tight sentences with the list scope, the conversion signal, and the filter/resolution guidance front-loaded; nothing is redundant and no filler is present.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully explains how to interpret the returned memberId, and it covers filtering and id resolution. Minor gaps remain — response shape and pagination/sorting behavior are left to the schema — but nothing essential to a correct call is missing.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond that by explaining that sourceId/stageId are foreign keys to be obtained from sibling list tools, which is meaningful cross-tool context the schema itself omits.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the studio's sales leads') and adds a scope-defining detail — leads are both open and converted, with a non-null memberId marking conversion. An agent can tell this apart from momence_list_members and the related lead-source/stage listers without opening another schema.

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 says what can be filtered (search text, lead source, pipeline stage) and directs the agent to resolve the source/stage ids via momence_list_lead_sources and momence_list_lead_stages. There is no explicit when-not or exclusion, but the routing guidance is clear and actionable.

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