kommo_search_deal

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

The description provides no behavioral information beyond the name. There are no annotations to assist. It does not disclose whether the search is read-only, what fields are searched, or any limits on results. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it sacrifices substance. While brevity is a virtue, the lack of detail makes it only partially effective, earning a middle score.

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 (one required parameter, no output schema), the description could be minimal but still complete if it explained the query behavior. It does not, leaving gaps in understanding. Sibling tools with more specific names indicate a need for clarity that is unmet.

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 single parameter 'query' is defined only by type 'string' in the schema, and the description adds no explanation of what constitutes a valid query (e.g., partial match, full-text, field-specific). With 0% schema_description_coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to guess its semantics.

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 'Search' and the resource 'deals', making the purpose direct. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_deals' or other search tools, missing a chance to clarify when to use this specifically.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'list_deals' for all deals, or other search tools for specific fields). The agent receives no context about the intended use case.

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