pipedrive_add_deal_follower

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

Annotations indicate it is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, and open-world. The description merely states the action without additional behavioral traits like authentication needs, side effects, or error handling. It adds no value beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise.

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?

For a simple tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on error cases (e.g., duplicate followers, invalid IDs) and the exact behavior of the operation.

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% (both parameters described). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 the action ('Add a follower') and the resource ('a deal'). Among sibling tools, there are similar add_follower tools for other resources, but the name and description together disambiguate. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to add a follower vs. remove or list followers). No prerequisites or context about when not to use it.

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