crm_analyze_picklist_dependencies

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral details such as read-only nature, potential for expensive analysis, or what happens with invalid module names. It only states what the tool identifies, lacking transparency about side effects or requirements.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of two clear sentences with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to meaning.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough to understand the tool's purpose but omits expected output format or how the analysis results are presented. It is adequate but leaves gaps for a tool that likely returns complex relationship data.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter module_name with a clear description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies given the high schema coverage.

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 analyzes picklist dependencies and relationships in a module, and specifies outputs like field dependencies, picklist chains, and relationship patterns. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like crm_get_dependent_fields or crm_get_field_relationships, making the purpose clear but not uniquely scoped.

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 does not mention preferred scenarios, exclude cases, or reference sibling tools, leaving the user to infer appropriate usage.

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