list_leads

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

The description discloses read-only and paginated behavior, which are key traits. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, sorting order, or error conditions, leaving some behavioral aspects implicit.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The first sentence captures the core purpose, the second lists filter capabilities, and the third provides cross-reference. Every sentence adds unique value and the front-loading is optimal.

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 8 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose, read-only nature, pagination, filters, and where to get valid values. It does not detail pagination parameters (but schema covers them) or explicitly state the output format beyond 'key fields + custom fields', which is sufficient for a list tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing filter categories (state, profile, country, date range) and directing to list_metadata for valid values, which goes beyond individual parameter descriptions.

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 lists BD leads with key fields and custom fields, specifies read-only and paginated behavior, and enumerates filter dimensions. It is distinct from all sibling tools (analytics reports and metadata lookup), so there is no ambiguity.

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 clear context: use this tool to list leads with pagination and filters. It recommends list_metadata for valid filter values, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly exclude any scenarios or compare with alternatives; since no sibling does the same thing, this is a minor gap.

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