autotask_create_opportunity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Create' which implies a write operation, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions, whether the operation is idempotent, error handling, or what the response looks like (since there's no output schema). This is inadequate for a mutation tool with 15 parameters.

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 a single, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity (15 parameters, 7 required), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not address behavioral aspects like side effects, error conditions, or return values, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer. For a creation tool in a business context, more guidance is needed.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3. It does not compensate with extra context like default behaviors or interdependencies between parameters.

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 the action ('Create') and resource ('new sales opportunity in Autotask'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not differentiate this tool from its sibling 'autotask_create_company' or other create tools, which would require specifying what makes an opportunity distinct from other entities.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing existing company or contact IDs, or when to choose this over other create tools like 'autotask_create_contact'. This leaves the agent without context for proper tool selection.

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