pipedrive_persons_merge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It mentions source merged into target (implying source deletion) and dry_run capability, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as what happens to related entities, error conditions, or whether the operation is reversible.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resources, then requirements.

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 destructive merge operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., existence of persons), and field merge behavior.

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 coverage is 75% with descriptions for three parameters. The description reinforces the roles of source and target and adds the confirmation requirement, but does not provide additional detail beyond the schema for the dry_run parameter.

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?

Clearly states the action (merge) and resources (two persons). Distinguishes from sibling tools as there is no other merge tool besides organizations_merge. However, it does not elaborate on the merge behavior beyond source into target.

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?

Specifies the requirement for a confirmation string 'MERGE' and supports dry_run. This provides some guidance on when to use, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with alternatives like copying or deleting.

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