crm_expansion_upsell

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly describes a read-oriented analysis tool without indicating any destructive actions. However, it does not disclose potential side effects or permission requirements, though the nature of the tool suggests none.

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 concise with three lines: a clear purpose sentence and parameter explanations. Front-loaded with the core action, every sentence adds value without filler. Efficiently structured.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, optional output schema exists), the description covers purpose and parameters adequately. It does not mention prerequisites or additional context, but the output schema handles return values. Slightly incomplete for advanced scenarios.

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 0%, so the description is crucial. It explains all three parameters: 'message' as a free-text objective, 'account_id' as required CRM ID, and 'min_arr_usd' as an ARR threshold to skip accounts. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's titles and types.

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 ('Identify') and resource ('expansion and upsell opportunities for an account'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like crm_lead_qualification or crm_icp_intelligence. It specifies the basis ('current product usage, peer benchmarks, and unmet jobs-to-be-done').

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 context (identifying opportunities based on usage and benchmarks) but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool compared to alternatives. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool mentions are provided.

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