create_lead

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only restates the core action of creating a lead; it does not mention required permissions, side effects, idempotency, response behavior, or what happens if required fields are missing. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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 a single short sentence with no filler: 'Cria um novo lead no Kommo CRM.' Every word earns its place, and the CRM context is useful and front-loaded.

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 tool with seven parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a closely related sibling create_complex_lead, this description is too sparse. It lacks usage routing, behavioral context, and any indication of what the agent should expect after invocation, despite the schema covering parameter semantics.

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 input schema already documents all seven parameters meaningfully. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, but because the schema handles this, the 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Cria um novo lead no Kommo CRM' (creates a new lead). It is specific enough to identify the operation, but it does not differentiate from the sibling tool create_complex_lead, which also creates leads, so it loses a point for missing sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus create_complex_lead or other lead-related tools. The description simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer when it is appropriate. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives are mentioned.

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