kommo_get_select_field_options

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Get'), but lacks details about potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error states. Given no annotations, the description alone does not fully disclose behavioral traits 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, concise sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 simplicity (two parameters, no output schema), the description provides a minimal understanding. However, it omits what the return value looks like (e.g., list of option strings) and does not cover edge cases or error scenarios. Additional detail about response format would enhance completeness.

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 description adds no meaning to the parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, it fails to explain that 'leadId' identifies the lead and 'fieldId' specifies the custom field. The agent would need to infer parameter usage from names alone.

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 verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'valid options for a select/dropdown custom field'. It unambiguously indicates the purpose and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools which focus on creating, updating, or listing CRM entities.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of preconditions, such as requiring a valid leadId and fieldId, or any indication of when not to use it.

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