list_leads

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the return shape (lead objects with embedded contacts and tags) and the pagination rule when limit exceeds 50.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and filtering, then return shape, then the alternative. No filler and nothing overloaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully describes the returned array and its embedded contacts/tags, and covers pagination. Adequate for a simple zero-required-param list tool; only minor gaps around total-count/ordering 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents limit, stage_id, and pipeline_id including the pipeline_id dependency for stage_id. The description only restates that results are capped at `limit`, adding little beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource (list leads) plus scope (optional pipeline/stage filtering). It is immediately distinguishable from get_lead and the mutation siblings like create_lead/delete_lead.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_lead for custom fields of a single lead, which is a clear use-vs-use distinction. It lacks when-not guidance for other siblings (bulk_update_leads, list_contacts), so it falls short of a 5.

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