crm_get_all_territories

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral detail. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but there is no disclosure about pagination, rate limits, or return format. The description adds minimal context beyond the name itself.

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, focused sentence with no irrelevant information. It is as concise as possible while conveying the essential purpose.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list-all tool, the description is sufficiently complete to enable correct selection and invocation. It could mention return shape or data scope, but the purpose is clear enough for a simple operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered by default. Baseline 4 is appropriate since no parameter documentation is needed.

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 'Get all territories' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (all territories), making it unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings, as no other sibling tool targets territories.

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 usage is implied: if an agent needs the full list of territories, this is the tool to use. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or any mention of alternatives, but given the uniqueness of the tool, the implied context suffices.

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