pipedrive_filters_results

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose pagination behavior (a genuine trait, backed by the cursor parameter), and 'run a saved filter and return' implies a read-only operation, but it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or invalid-filter 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the purpose and pagination note both earn their place. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be maximally helpful for a six-parameter tool.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source for behavioral context, and it explains only pagination and the general return ('matching entities'). The schema fully covers inputs, so the gap is mainly around the return shape and prerequisites, which is a moderate but not severe omission.

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 six parameters including limits, cursor, sort fields, and the entity_type enum. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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 specific verb ('Run') and resource ('a saved filter') and clarifies the outcome ('return matching entities with pagination'). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from sibling list tools (pipedrive_deals_list, pipedrive_persons_list) which can return the same entity types.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over direct list tools, and no stated prerequisite that a filter_id must first be obtained (e.g., from pipedrive_filters_list). The saved-filter framing implies a workflow but leaves the agent to infer it.

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