hot_leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' strongly implies a read-only query, and the status=new filter is useful context, but the description omits any explicit side-effect, permission, pagination, or ordering behavior.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The key qualifier (status=new) and purpose (waiting for proposal) are both immediately visible.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it identifies the resource and the relevant status filter. A minor gap remains in not clarifying how this list relates to other lead-oriented siblings such as list_outreach or chase_leads.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The baseline score for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the tool's filtering semantics instead.

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 gives a specific verb (List) and resource (leads), plus a clear scope filter (status=new, waiting for your proposal). It distinguishes this from generic lead lists through the proposal-ready stage, but it does not explicitly name or contrast a sibling tool.

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 phrase 'waiting for your proposal' implies the tool should be used when the agent needs new leads ready for proposal outreach. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance and does not route to alternatives among the many sibling lead-handling tools.

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