crm_list_objects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it mentions filtering and pagination capabilities, it doesn't describe important behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, rate limits, error conditions, or the format/structure of returned data. For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or unnecessary information. The structure is clear and direct.

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 with 5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain the return format, error handling, authentication requirements, or provide enough context about parameter usage. Given the complexity and lack of structured documentation, the description should do much more to help an agent understand how to use this tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 5 parameters, the description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. While it mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which hints at some parameters, it doesn't explain what 'objectType' values mean, what 'properties' refers to, how 'after' works for pagination, what 'limit' constraints exist, or what 'archived' controls. The description adds minimal value beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 the action ('List') and resource ('CRM objects of a specific type'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like crm_search_objects or crm_list_association_types, which could cause confusion about when to use this specific listing tool versus search or other list operations.

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 description mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which implies some usage context, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like crm_search_objects or crm_get_object. With many sibling tools available, the lack of differentiation guidance is a significant gap.

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