crm_agentic_plan

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions routing under JWT, tenant, and company scope but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies state), required permissions, or potential impact. The description leaves the agent uninformed about the tool's behavior beyond execution.

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?

Efficient three-sentence description with a clear list of args. Front-loaded with the primary action ('Run the crm domain agent action agentic_plan'). No extraneous text.

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 an output schema (not shown in description), the description does not explain what the agentic_plan action entails (e.g., creating, modifying, or querying plans). With many CRM siblings, the description could provide more context about the tool's role within the CRM domain. Adequate but leaves gaps about the action's broader purpose.

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 0%, but the description adds clear purpose for both parameters: 'message' as free-text objective and 'inputs' as optional JSON string for structured inputs. This meaningfully supplements the schema, though it could further specify expected format for 'inputs'.

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?

Clearly states it runs the CRM domain agent action 'agentic_plan' and routes through the dispatcher. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling CRM tools (e.g., crm_chat, crm_plan_sequence). The description identifies the specific action but lacks context on what makes this action unique.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does without specifying scenarios, prerequisites, or when to choose it over other CRM tools.

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