Get Lead Stage

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already conveys. It does not mention edge cases such as missing leads, invalid campaign IDs, or the meaning of an absent stage, but the annotation sufficiently covers the safety profile and the description does not contradict it.

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 a single, direct sentence that front-loads the operation and resource with no superfluous words. It is maximally concise while still being informative.

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 simple read-only tool with complete parameter schema, a readOnlyHint annotation, and an output schema present, the description provides sufficient context to select and invoke the tool. It could be slightly more complete with a note on typical use cases, but nothing essential 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?

The input schema already fully describes both required parameters (linkedin_url and campaign_id) with clear definitions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add extra meaning about the parameters, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current stage of a lead in a campaign'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It uniquely identifies the operation among sibling tools such as get_campaign_status and get_leads_in_campaign, so there is no ambiguity about the resource or scope.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. There are no exclusions, alternative recommendations, or context for typical scenarios, so the agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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