search_deals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses two useful traits — a module/authorization prerequisite and paginated returns — but says nothing about error behavior when the Sales module is absent, result ordering, or what fields come back. Adequate but incomplete for a no-annotation 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?

Three short sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core action and resource. The prerequisite and return-shape notes are appended in the order an agent would need them.

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 an 8-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, filter surface, prerequisite, and pagination. It could say more about the shape of returned deal records, but the essential calling information 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 description coverage is 100%, so every one of the 8 parameters is already documented (page, pageSize, search, status, stageId, pipelineId, leadId, tagId). The description's filter list roughly mirrors the schema without adding format, defaults, or ID-resolution guidance. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Search CRM deals (sales opportunities) in the pipeline') and enumerates the filter dimensions available. The resource noun distinguishes it from search_leads/search_accounts, though no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite and routing instruction: 'Requires the Sales module — call get_enabled_modules first for CB orgs.' That is concrete operational guidance beyond most descriptions. It does not, however, say when to use search_deals versus the sibling get_deal for retrieving a single record.

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