crm_query_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions routing under JWT, tenant, and company scope. It does not state whether the action is read-only or writes data, what side effects may occur, or any required permissions. For a tool that executes an action, this is a significant gap.

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 sentences and an argument list. It front-loads the core purpose. No unnecessary words, but the structure could be improved by grouping information more clearly.

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 has an output schema (unknown content), 2 parameters, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the action returns, provide usage examples, or clarify how 'message' and 'inputs' interact. The agent would need additional context to use this tool effectively.

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 must compensate. It adds that 'message' is a free-text objective and 'inputs' is an optional JSON string of structured inputs. This provides basic semantics beyond the schema defaults, but lacks format examples, constraints, or how they interact.

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?

Description states it runs the CRM domain agent action `query_data` and routes through the platform dispatcher under scope. The verb 'Run' and resource 'crm domain agent action query_data' are specific, but the description does not elaborate on what query_data actually does beyond being an action. It distinguishes from siblings by naming the specific action, but does not explain how this differs from other CRM tools like crm_assess_pipeline.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. With many sibling CRM tools, the AI agent lacks direction on whether to use this generic query or a specialized one.

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