pipedrive_people_needing_followup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Find' implies a read-only operation and the ownership/scoping semantics are disclosed, but there is no statement about result format, pagination behavior, or what happens when no contacts match. Adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and packs the scoping condition with no wasted 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?

For a simple read-only list tool whose pagination parameters are fully documented in the schema, the description covers the essential filter semantics. It stops short of hinting at the shape of returned contact records (no output schema exists), which is a minor gap rather than a blocker.

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, cursor, and as_user are already fully documented in the schema. The description echoes the as_user concept ('or as_user') but adds no syntax, defaults, or edge-case detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct here.

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 (Find), a specific resource (contacts), and a precise qualifying condition (no next activity scheduled, owned by current user/as_user). This distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like pipedrive_my_upcoming_activities, pipedrive_my_overdue_activities, and pipedrive_persons_list without needing the schema.

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 scoping criteria imply when the tool is appropriate, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and no alternatives named (e.g., my_overdue_activities for activities that are overdue rather than missing). Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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