bitrix_create_deal

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

The description mentions the confirm=true requirement, but this is already documented in the input schema, so it adds no new behavioral information. With no annotations provided, the description does not disclose response behavior, auth needs, side effects, or reversibility beyond the obvious fact that it creates a deal.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the confirm requirement is presented as a compact secondary note.

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?

Despite having 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides almost no contextual information. It does not explain what the tool returns, what prerequisites exist, or how it relates to sibling deal tools beyond the obvious creation action.

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 input schema covers all 9 parameters with 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add parameter-level meaning beyond repeating the confirm requirement, which is already in the schema.

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 'Создать' (create) with a clear resource 'сделку в Bitrix24 CRM' (deal in Bitrix24 CRM). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like bitrix_update_deal, bitrix_list_deals, and bitrix_get_deal.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bitrix_update_deal or bitrix_list_deals. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are stated, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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