sf_pipeline_summary

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether openOnly parameter affects closed pipeline, any auth needs, rate limits, or side effects. For a missing annotations scenario, description should carry more weight but fails to.

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?

Single sentence is concise but lacks structure; no wasted words, but also no additional detail beyond purpose. Acceptable for a short description.

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?

With no output schema and only one parameter, description is minimally complete but fails to explain output format or the default behavior of openOnly. Gaps remain for agent to invoke correctly.

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%; with one parameter (openOnly) defaulting to true, description mentions 'open pipeline' but does not explain the parameter's effect or that setting false includes closed pipeline. No added value beyond 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?

Description clearly states verb 'Summarize' and resource 'open pipeline by stage' with specific metrics (count, total amount, average probability, weighted pipeline). This distinguishes from sibling tools like sf_pipeline_by_campaign and sf_forecast_summary.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., sf_pipeline_by_campaign, sf_pipeline_by_lead_source). No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for when not to use.

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