getLeadActivitiesV2

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

While there are no annotations, the description adds behavioral context by specifying pagination method (cursor/offset-based) and timezone support. However, it does not disclose other important traits such as permissions, rate limits, or error handling, which are typically needed for mutation-like operations but less critical for a simple read. The description partially fulfills the burden.

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 is front-loaded with the core action and key differentiators. It is appropriately sized, though it could be slightly expanded to include more usage context. Still, it efficiently communicates the essential information.

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's simplicity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main features (v2, pagination, timezone). However, it lacks details on pagination behavior (e.g., default limit, how cursor vs offset work together) and return format, which leaves some gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reiterates pagination and timezone concepts that correspond to parameters, but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. No additional parameter details are given.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'activity history for a lead'. It distinguishes the tool from its sibling by specifying 'v2' and by mentioning cursor/offset-based pagination with timezone support, which sets it apart from getLeadActivitiesV1.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getLeadActivitiesV1. It lacks explicit context for optimal usage or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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