volkern_list_deals

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'optional filters' but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (implied by 'page' and 'limit' parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the response format looks like (no output schema). This leaves significant gaps for a listing tool with multiple parameters.

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 ('List deals/opportunities') and adds essential context ('in the sales pipeline with optional filters'). There's no wasted wording, making it appropriately concise for a straightforward listing tool.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, pagination behavior, error conditions, or how filters interact. For a list operation with multiple filtering options, more contextual guidance is needed to complement the partial schema coverage.

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 67% (4 out of 6 parameters have descriptions), providing solid baseline documentation. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'optional filters' in general, but doesn't elaborate on parameter usage, relationships, or constraints beyond what the schema already covers for most parameters.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deals/opportunities in the sales pipeline'), and mentions optional filters. It distinguishes this as a listing operation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'volkern_list_leads' or 'volkern_list_contacts' beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'volkern_get_deal' (for single deal retrieval) or 'volkern_list_pipeline_stages' (for stage listing), nor does it specify prerequisites or contextual constraints for filtering deals.

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