pipedrive_create_stage

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write operation. The description adds the detail about deal rotting configuration but does not disclose any other behavioral traits beyond the schema fields.

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 sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the purpose. Efficient and clear.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description is sufficient for a simple create tool. It covers the required fields and an optional feature, assuming the agent can infer behavior from the resource type and annotations.

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 has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds that 'name and pipeline_id are required' and that deal rotting parameters configure deal rotting, which is already implied by the schema descriptions. Marginal added value.

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 'Create a new stage in a pipeline', specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pipedrive_create_phase or pipedrive_create_pipeline by focusing on stages.

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 mentions required fields (name, pipeline_id) and optional deal rotting configuration, but does not provide guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like pipedrive_create_phase or pipedrive_create_pipeline.

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