ghl_search_opportunities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this is a read-only operation, does not describe pagination behavior, return format, or any side effects. It only states the action and filters.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and key filters. No wasted words.

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?

The description is adequate for a basic search tool but leaves gaps: no mention of pagination, return structure, or how filters interact. With no output schema or annotations, the agent has limited information about what to expect.

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 63%, so the baseline is 3. The description paraphrases the filter parameters already described in the schema (contact, stage, pipeline, status, assigned user) but does not add meaning for page, limit, or query, nor does it clarify status enum values or how filters combine.

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 searches opportunities in the pipeline, with a specific verb and resource. It lists the main filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that get, create, update, or delete opportunities.

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 implies usage for searching opportunities with filters, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives like ghl_get_opportunity for retrieving a single record, nor does it state when not to use this tool. It provides clear context but no exclusions.

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