lead_search_at_scaleFind and scrape LinkedIn leads at scale to build targeted prospect lists for sales outreach.
Find and scrape leads at scale
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "lead_search_at_scale"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool finds and scrapes leads, with no mention of rate limits, long-running processes, pagination, or side effects. This is a vague outline rather than a transparent account of 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?
The description is a single efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource. It is slightly too sparse for the number of sibling tools, but as far as conciseness itself, it is appropriately lean.
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 tool named 'lead_search_at_scale' with many similar siblings and no output schema, the description is too incomplete. It does not explain what 'at scale' means in practice, how results are returned, or what inputs are expected despite having no schema parameters.
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 zero parameters, so there is no parameter ambiguity to explain. The schema is effectively complete, and the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation.
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 a verb ('find and scrape') and a resource ('leads'), and the phrase 'at scale' hints at a bulk operation that differentiates it from more targeted tools like search_leads or search_decision_makers. However, it does not explicitly name a sibling or specify what makes this the scalable version.
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 search tools. The phrase 'at scale' implies it should be used for bulk lead acquisition, but the description does not state that or mention any alternatives or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.