crm_list_leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('List') without mentioning whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, what the return format looks like, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

The description is extremely concise with just three words, front-loaded with the key action and resource. There's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters. It doesn't explain what 'leads/opportunities' entails, the return format, or behavioral aspects like pagination or error handling, leaving the agent with insufficient context for effective use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for all three parameters (stage, user_id, limit). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for adequate coverage without extra value.

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 'List CRM leads/opportunities' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('CRM leads/opportunities'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'contacts_list' or 'sales_list_orders' that also list different resources, so it's not fully specific to sibling context.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'contacts_list' and 'crm_create_lead' available, there's no indication of when this tool is appropriate (e.g., for CRM-specific leads vs. general contacts) or any prerequisites for usage.

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