ghl_create_opportunity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for disclosing side effects. It only says 'Create' without noting required parameters, whether an opportunity ID is returned, or any error conditions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, clear sentence front-loaded with the action and object. It contains no filler or repetition, earning high marks for conciseness.

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 has 9 parameters, 4 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the one-sentence description is inadequate. It fails to mention required fields, expected return value, or any pipeline/contact context that would help an agent invoke the tool 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?

The schema already documents 6 of 9 parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters, leaving undocumented params like source, status, and customFields unexplained. The moderate schema coverage (67%) is not compensated.

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 the verb 'Create' with the resource 'opportunity/deal' and specifies 'in a pipeline', clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like ghl_update_opportunity, ghl_upsert_opportunity, and ghl_delete_opportunity. It unambiguously states the tool's function.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ghl_upsert_opportunity or ghl_update_opportunity. The description simply states the action without mentioning prerequisites, exclusions, or sibling-tool comparisons.

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