pipedrive_stale_deals

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 query, which is the core behavioral signal, but it says nothing about pagination, result ordering, or what happens with the shared-token as_user behavior beyond what the schema documents.

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 with no filler; the core behavior and its default are front-loaded and the optional filters follow. Every clause earns 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 5-parameter query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose but omits pagination behavior (limit/cursor) and return shape, leaving gaps an agent would otherwise need to guess.

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 80%, so most parameters are self-documented. The description adds the semantic link that 'filter by user or pipeline' maps to as_user/pipeline_id (pipeline_id has no schema description of its own), but the days default of 30 is merely repeated from the schema.

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+resource ('Find open deals') plus the defining filter criterion ('haven't been updated in N days'), which distinguishes it from general listing siblings like pipedrive_deals_list. It does not name the nearest counterpart (pipedrive_recently_updated), so the differentiation is left to inference.

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 phrasing 'haven't been updated in N days' implies the use case (stale-deal follow-up) and mirrors a sibling like pipedrive_people_needing_followup. However there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or routing to alternatives such as pipedrive_my_open_deals, so guidance is only implied.

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