get_deal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns data but does not disclose any behavioral aspects beyond that, such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether custom fields are always included. For a simple read tool, minimal transparency is acceptable, but some additional context would improve the score.

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 consists of two short sentences. The first sentence states the primary purpose clearly, and the second sentence provides an alternative and context. Every sentence is valuable and efficient, with no wasted words.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple read tool with one parameter. However, since there is no output schema, it could mention that the response includes both standard fields and custom fields. The mention of the summary tool partially compensates, but slightly more detail about what 'dados e campos personalizados' entails would make it fully complete.

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 schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter deal_id, with a description 'ID do negócio'. The tool's description does not add any further meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore, baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns data and custom fields of a deal. It distinguishes from the sibling tool get_deal_summary by noting that for a complete analysis including activities, notes, person, and history, the summary tool is preferred.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for basic data and custom fields) and when to use the alternative get_deal_summary (for complete analysis). This provides clear usage guidance.

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