search_idle_leads

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well. It explains the dual-date logic (updatedAt AND latestActivityCreatedAt), clarifies the 'effective last activity' concept, and provides important behavioral details like default values, maximum page size, and the 0-based pagination system. It doesn't mention rate limits or authentication requirements, but covers core operational behavior thoroughly.

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 efficiently structured with the core purpose first, followed by behavioral details, then parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value - no redundant information. The parameter explanations are terse but complete, using minimal words to convey maximum information.

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 (5 parameters, dual-date logic, pagination) and the presence of an output schema (which means return values don't need explanation), the description is complete. It covers all necessary operational context, parameter semantics, and behavioral details that an agent would need to correctly invoke this search tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing clear semantic explanations for all 5 parameters. Each parameter gets specific guidance: 'days' explains the threshold logic with an example, 'time_zone' specifies IANA format with defaults, 'page' clarifies 0-based indexing, 'size' states maximum limit, and 'sort' provides format examples. This adds substantial value beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search for idle/stagnant leads' with specific criteria about activity thresholds. It distinguishes from sibling 'search_leads' by focusing specifically on inactive leads rather than general lead searching, making the differentiation explicit.

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 clear context about when to use this tool (searching for leads with no activity for a specified number of days). It doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives, though the sibling list includes 'search_leads' which would presumably be for general lead searching.

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