Add lead source

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the '[Premium]' requirement and the instruction that fields go inside 'params', which is useful but does not disclose side effects, return values, or authentication needs beyond what annotations provide.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short, purposeful sentences. It front-loads the action and includes only necessary details, with no redundant wording.

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?

This is a mutation tool with an opaque 'params' structure and no output schema. The description does not explain how to determine success, what fields are typically expected, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'get_sources' and 'update_source', leaving major gaps for an agent to use it effectively.

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 schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'params', described as 'Object of fields passed to Smart NPV as documented in its API'. The description merely repeats 'Fields go inside params', adding no new meaning or detail 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 action ('Add') and the resource ('main lead source'), which distinguishes it from the sibling 'update_source'. However, the term 'main' is ambiguous, and no explicit differentiation from siblings is provided beyond the verb.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention 'update_source' for modifications or any conditions/prerequisites for adding a source, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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