pipedrive_deals_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state that. It includes pagination details but lacks explanation of cursor-based pagination or error handling.

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 very concise, with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then specify return fields. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the complexity (16 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema), the description is too minimal. It lacks details on pagination mechanics, parameter usage, and response structure beyond the listed fields.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it only mentions filters and pagination broadly without explaining the 16 parameters. The return fields hint at some filterable attributes but do not clarify the purpose of parameters like custom_field_keys or cursor.

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 lists deals with filters and pagination and specifies the return fields. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, get, and search, but could more explicitly differentiate from pipedrive_deals_search or pipedrive_deals_summary.

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 filters and pagination, implying when to use it, but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it. Given many sibling tools, clearer guidance would be helpful.

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