post-crm-objects-v4-objtype-merge_merge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the body parameter requirement but does not disclose that merging typically deletes or modifies the source object, nor any data-loss implications. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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: two sentences plus an example, front-loaded with the core action. No filler, though the body/schema mismatch slightly detracts from clarity.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist. The description omits essential context like the fate of the merged object, return behavior, and the correct placement of parameters (body vs top-level). The discrepancy between the documented 'body' and schema parameters makes the tool incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 descriptions are generic ('string parameter'), but the example clarifies the roles of objectIdToMerge and primaryObjectId. However, it also introduces a 'body' parameter not reflected in the schema, which confuses rather than clarifies. Baseline 3 applies since schema coverage is nominally 100%.

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 states 'Merge two objects with same type' which clearly identifies the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling v3 merge tool (post-crm-v3-objects-objtype-merge_merge), so it is clear but not fully distinguishing.

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?

It provides an explicit requirement ('REQUIRES body parameter with merge details') and an example, giving some usage guidance. However, it lacks any mention of when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any exclusion criteria, so usage context is only implied.

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