List leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the basic action and filters, without mentioning pagination behavior, default ordering, return format, or any other operational details needed for a safe invocation.

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, front-loaded sentence of 12 words. It states the verb, resource, scope, and optional filters with zero wasted words, making it highly concise and structured.

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 simple list tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose and filter options but omits pagination behavior, return value details, and any safety hints. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps an agent would need to infer.

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 only 25% (only bot_id has a description). The description adds that bot_id and status are optional filters and can be combined, but it says nothing about page or per_page semantics, leaving half the parameters effectively undocumented.

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 clearly states the tool lists leads for the workspace, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('leads') with a scope. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by naming the distinct resource type, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives.

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 when to use the tool (when leads are needed for the workspace) and mentions optional filters, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or direct references to alternatives among sibling list tools.

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