Prepare Client Brief

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it requires exact slugs, produces only summaries and follow-ups (not full data), and includes configurable lookback and limits. This helps the agent set expectations.

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 dense but well-structured: opening purpose, then output components, then input constraints, then return scope. It is longer than the calibration examples but every sentence adds value; the list of outputs is long but necessary given the tool's breadth.

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's complexity (10 parameters, many output sections), the description, full param schema, and output schema together provide complete guidance. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, input requirements, output scope, and doesn't need to explain return values since an output schema exists.

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 100%, with each parameter having a clear description and default. The tool description reinforces the slug input constraint but does not add new per-parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Prepares a client/account briefing') and clearly identifies the resource (Recruit CRM client/company data) and the use context (before client calls, meetings, etc.). It lists concrete outputs and distinguishes itself from sibling CRUD/search tools, which are all narrower operations.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool (before client calls, meetings, check-ins, etc.) and gives input guidance (exact contact_slug or company_slug, not display names). Does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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