crm_create_deal

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

The description discloses substantial behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it states the operation is 'Writes, additively,' explains the idempotency key mechanism, the in-process key store limitation ('covers retries within a session and not restarts'), cache invalidation, and the minimum property requirement. These details go well beyond the annotations' idempotentHint and destructiveHint flags.

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 effectively structured into three paragraphs: purpose, prerequisite guidance, and behavioral details. Every sentence provides necessary information with zero fluff. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool.

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—6 optional parameters, external dependency on crm_list_pipelines, OAuth scope requirements, idempotency semantics, and cache invalidation—the description covers all essential context. Return values are covered by the output schema, so no further explanation 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 input schema already provides strong descriptions for all 6 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds critical cross-parameter semantics, noting that HubSpot 'only accepts a stage id that belongs to the chosen pipeline' and explaining idempotency_key behavior ('or by a hash of the properties when none is given'). This adds meaningful meaning beyond the 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 function: 'Create one HubSpot deal from the properties given and return the new record.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the sibling crm_update_deal by explicitly saying 'Use crm_update_deal to move an existing deal.'

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance with a prerequisite call: 'Call crm_list_pipelines first when setting pipeline or dealstage,' and directs users to an alternative tool: 'Use crm_update_deal to move an existing deal.' Also states the required OAuth scope and the condition 'At least one property must be supplied.'

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