update_lead_fields

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

With no annotations, the description only implies mutation via 'update'. It fails to disclose idempotency, permission requirements, or what happens if some fields fail. The description should provide more behavioral context.

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 at two sentences, front-loading the core action. However, it lacks structured details like parameter grouping or format specifications, which would improve usability without much length.

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 14 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is insufficient for correct tool use. It does not explain standard fields or provide examples for custom_fields_json, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 explains custom_fields_json as 'a JSON object of field_name:value pairs', but leaves 13 other parameters (e.g., status, case_type) unexplained, offering minimal added meaning.

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 clearly states 'Update multiple fields on an existing lead at once', specifying the action and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools that update single fields, relying on the implicit 'at once' to suggest batching.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus single-field update siblings like update_lead_status or update_lead_owner. The description does not indicate preferred scenarios or criteria for batching updates.

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