createLead

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that extra columns go into extra_metadata_fields; it does not mention permissions, idempotency, potential for duplicates, or what the response contains after creation.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded and the extra-columns note is a useful, concise addition.

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?

The schema fully documents all seven parameters, and the description covers the basic operation and extra-column handling. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description does not disclose the response format or side effects, leaving part of the behavioral picture incomplete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by explaining that extra columns beyond the schema should be placed in extra_metadata_fields, which goes beyond the schema's per-property descriptions.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'a contact / lead', so an agent can tell this tool creates leads rather than reading them or managing other entities. It does not explicitly compare itself to siblings like createAgent, but the resource naming is distinct enough.

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 about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as createAgent or listLeads, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The only implicit signal is the tool name and the 'Add a contact / lead' phrasing.

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