post-crm-v3-objects-quotes-search_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions a required body parameter but does not describe output format, pagination behavior, error conditions, or whether it returns a list. The example hints at request structure but offers no insight into response behavior.

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 short but not optimally structured. It leads with the HTTP method and endpoint, then gives a requirement and an example. The example is useful but inline JSON makes it less scannable. It earns its place but could be clearer if condensed or formatted.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain that the tool returns matching quote objects, that results can be paginated, or how limits apply. An agent would need to inspect sibling tools or make assumptions about the response.

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 a concrete example showing how to structure filterGroups and properties, which clarifies parameter usage beyond the schema's individual descriptions. However, it does not compensate for the 0 required parameters discrepancy (description implies body is required while schema marks none as required).

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 identifies the endpoint as a search operation on quotes ('POST /crm/v3/objects/quotes/search') and provides an example of search criteria, making the core purpose clear. It distinguishes from sibling search tools (e.g., line_items, invoices) by the resource name, though it lacks an explicit verb phrase like 'Search for quotes'.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this search endpoint versus alternatives like batch-read or individual get. It only states a requirement ('REQUIRES body parameter') without explaining when search is preferable or what distinguishes it from other read operations.

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