crm_expansion_upsell

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

Annotations mark readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, but the description says 'Identify expansion opportunities', which implies a read-only analytical action with no side effects. This contradicts the annotations and misleads the agent about the tool's behavior.

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 compact with a clear purpose sentence plus a helpful args list. No filler. Slight redundancy in listing args inside the description when the schema already lists properties, but the added explanations justify it.

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 covers what and parameters, but misses two critical contexts: when to use it and its destructive/side-effect profile. The output schema exists, so return details are not needed, but the missing usage and behavioral guidance leaves the agent under-informed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by briefly explaining all three parameters: message as free-text objective, account_id as CRM account ID, and min_arr_usd as an ARR threshold. Though the message description is minimal, it adds meaning beyond the bare 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 states a specific verb ('Identify'), a resource ('expansion and upsell opportunities'), and a basis ('product usage, peer benchmarks, unmet JTBD'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like crm_customer_health_risk or crm_assess_pipeline, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus other CRM analytic tools. There are no when/when-not statements, alternatives, or exclusions. The purpose is implied but not actionable as a usage rule.

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