move_lead_stage

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

Annotations already declare it non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the result shape ("Returns the updated lead") and the cross-pipeline condition, which is genuinely beyond the annotations; it stops short of stating failure behavior or what happens to other lead fields.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and return value, then the alternative routing, then the conditional param note. No filler and no repetition that isn't doing routing work.

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 states the return value, and all three parameters are fully documented. For a 3-param, non-destructive tool this is nearly complete; only error/edge-case behavior (invalid stage or cross-pipeline mismatch) is unaddressed.

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 100% and every schema description already explains its parameter, including the exact pipeline_id conditional that the description repeats. Baseline 3 applies since the description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond 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 ("Move a lead to another stage") and names the mechanism (status_id, pipeline_id) plus the return value. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling update_lead, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

"Use this instead of update_lead for pipeline moves" names the alternative and the condition selecting it, and "Pass pipeline_id when moving to a stage in a different pipeline" gives the conditional trigger for the optional param. Explicit when-to-use plus alternative routing.

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