Pipedrive MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions retrieving 'detailed information' but lacks behavioral details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or whether it's idempotent. For a read operation without annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond basic functionality.

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 that efficiently conveys the core purpose with zero waste. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward read operation and front-loads the key information (get deal details by ID).

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 read tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context (no annotations) and doesn't explain return values. The 100% schema coverage helps, but without annotations or output schema, the description doesn't fully compensate for missing behavioral transparency.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters (id, include_fields, custom_fields). The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'all standard and custom fields' which aligns with the custom_fields parameter, but doesn't provide additional syntax or usage details beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 verb ('Get detailed information') and resource ('about a specific deal by ID'), including scope ('all standard and custom fields'). It distinguishes from list/search siblings by focusing on a single deal, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like pipedrive_list_deals or pipedrive_search_deals.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies it's for retrieving a specific deal by ID, it doesn't mention when to choose this over pipedrive_list_deals (for multiple deals) or pipedrive_search_deals (for filtered searches). No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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