pipedrive_my_overdue_activities

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. 'Show' implies a read-only operation and the scope is well stated, but there is no disclosure of permissions needed, rate limits, whether 'done' is based on a specific status field, or how paging behaves beyond what the schema params say.

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 tight sentence with the core filter and the user-scope caveat front-loaded. No filler, nothing that doesn't earn its place.

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 no-required-param list tool with three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It could mention the shape of returned activities or pagination behavior, but no critical calling information is missing.

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 limit and cursor are fully documented in the schema. The description echoes the 'as_user' concept ('or as_user'), adding a small amount of context but no syntax or semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Show) and resource (activities) plus two sharp scope qualifiers: 'past due' and 'not yet done' for the current user. That combination clearly separates it from sibling pipedrive_my_upcoming_activities and pipedrive_activities_list, though no sibling is named.

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 filter conditions ('past due and not yet done') imply when the tool is useful, and the 'as_user' aside hints at the shared-token scenario. However, it never explicitly contrasts with the nearby siblings (my_upcoming_activities, activities_list), leaving the agent to infer the routing.

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