pipeline_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the aggregation logic (counts, totals, stale deal detection) but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, or performance considerations. The behavioral disclosure is moderate.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and structured into digestible bullet points. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Without an output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (deal count per stage, total value, stale deals). It also covers filtering. However, it does not describe the response structure (e.g., whether it's a list of stage objects) or pagination, leaving minor gaps.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage (broker_id and pipeline_id). The description adds usage context (filtering options) but does not provide additional semantic depth beyond what the schema already states. 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 clearly states it provides a pipeline overview with deals per stage, total values, and stale deals, and includes specific query examples like 'How's the pipeline looking?'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list or search individual entities.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool ('use when asked: "How's the pipeline looking?" or "Give me a sales overview."') and mentions optional filters. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative tools, but the context is clear.

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