get_lead_recommendations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the subscription requirement, which is useful context, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, response format, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes a key constraint. There is no wasted text, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and a prerequisite but lacks details on behavior, return values, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a tool with 2 parameters and no structured support, this leaves significant gaps in context.

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 both parameters ('start' and 'count') clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 without compensating or adding value.

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 ('Get') and resource ('lead recommendations from Sales Navigator'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'sales_search_leads' or 'get_saved_leads', which might offer alternative ways to access lead data, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 includes a prerequisite ('requires Sales Navigator subscription'), which provides some context for when to use it. However, it doesn't specify when to choose this tool over similar siblings like 'sales_search_leads' or 'get_saved_leads', leaving usage guidelines implied rather than explicit.

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