ghl_opportunities_get

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get all', which implies a read operation, but it does not mention pagination (limit/offset), potential rate limits, or whether 'all' truly means all pages. The presence of limit and offset parameters in the schema suggests pagination behavior that is not described.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core verb and resource.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief to be complete. It lacks mention of pagination, filtering options, return format, and how it handles the locationId fallback described in the schema. The contradiction between required locationId and 'uses GHL_LOCATION_ID if omitted' in the schema further highlights the need for clearer contextual guidance.

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 description adds no meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions 'for a location', which aligns with locationId, but does not clarify limit, offset, stageId, or pipelineId. Schema coverage is 60%, leaving limit and offset undocumented, and the description does not compensate.

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 'Get all opportunities for a location' clearly specifies the action (Get), resource (opportunities), and scope (by location). This distinguishes it from the sibling ghl_opportunity_get, which presumably fetches a single opportunity.

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 implies usage when you need a list of opportunities for a location, but it does not state when to prefer this over ghl_opportunity_get or how filtering by pipeline/stage works. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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