crm_search_leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: no mention of read/write nature (though 'search' implies read-only), no pagination details (despite 'limit' and 'after' parameters), no rate limits, no authentication requirements, and no error handling. The description adds no context beyond the basic action.

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 wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool, though it could be more informative. The structure is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the complexity (5 parameters, nested filtering logic, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain the search functionality, parameter usage, return format, or behavioral expectations. For a tool with rich filtering capabilities and no structured documentation elsewhere, this description fails to provide necessary context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'lead-specific filters' but doesn't explain any parameters (filterGroups, properties, limit, after, sorts) or their semantics. The description adds no meaningful information beyond what's inferable from the tool name, leaving all 5 parameters undocumented.

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 'Search leads with lead-specific filters' states the verb ('search') and resource ('leads'), but is vague about what 'lead-specific filters' means. It distinguishes from non-CRM siblings but not clearly from other CRM search tools like crm_search_companies or crm_search_contacts, which have similar structures but target different resources.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like crm_get_lead (for single lead retrieval) or other CRM search tools. The description mentions 'lead-specific filters' but doesn't explain what makes them specific or when this tool is preferred over simpler list operations.

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