list_deal_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or data freshness. The schema shows defaults but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic filtering capability.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides an alternative. No redundant or irrelevant 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It explains the purpose and alternative but lacks details about pagination, sorting, or result format. While the schema provides defaults, an agent might need more guidance on how results are ordered or how pagination works.

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%, with each parameter already described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond stating 'filtro por status', which corresponds to the 'done' parameter but is already covered by 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists activities of a deal with status filtering. It uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('atividades de um deal'), and distinguishes from the sibling get_deal_summary by advising to use it for a complete view.

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 provides an explicit alternative (get_deal_summary) for when a complete deal view is needed. However, it does not mention when to avoid this tool in favor of list_activities (which may list all activities globally) or other non-deal-specific tools.

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