list_deals

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond those flags: it requires an API key, returns a revenue summary, and clarifies that money is in minor currency units (cents). It also explicitly states 'Reads only.' No contradiction with annotations.

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 tightly structured: first sentence gives the functional definition, second covers usage guidance, third covers behavior and return details. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Without an output schema, the description fully compensates by explaining the return payload (deals plus revenue summary), the currency unit conversion, and the filtering/pagination behavior. It also positions the tool within the sibling set, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds general context about filtering by status and pagination, but it does not deepen the meaning of individual parameters beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('deals') and defines the output shape ('flat, paged array, optionally filtered by status, with revenue totals'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_pipeline, which returns the same deals grouped into stages.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Use this when you want deals as data — to count them, filter one status, or page through many.' It also names the alternative (get_pipeline) for board-view needs, making the when-to-use-versus-alternative decision unmistakable.

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