pipedrive_create_organization_field

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

The description adds context about required parameters and the field_code in the response. Annotations already indicate non-destructive, non-readonly behavior; description does not contradict and provides moderate additional behavioral info.

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 (3 sentences) with no unnecessary information. It front-loads the main action and follows with key details. Every sentence is useful.

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?

While the description covers essential points, it lacks information about the return value structure beyond field_code. Given the complexity of the input schema (nested objects), a bit more context on the response would improve completeness.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by emphasizing required fields and the condition for options. It also notes the response includes field_code for future updates. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3, but description provides extra meaningful guidance.

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 tool's purpose: 'Create an organization custom field.' It specifies required parameters and conditions for enum/set types, distinguishing it from other field creation tools.

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 implies usage for creating organization custom fields but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_deal_field or provide use/no-use cases.

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