list_deals

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses key behaviors: pagination via start/limit (with max 500 per page), automatic retrieval of all records via buscar_todos (max 5000), and that buscar_todos ignores start/limit. This exceeds what the input schema conveys.

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 concise, comprising two sentences that front-load the main action and then add filtering and pagination details. No extraneous information.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers core functionality but omits output details (e.g., fields returned) and potential side effects. It is adequate for a simple list tool but lacks completeness for complex edge cases.

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%, so the description adds limited new meaning. It reinforces filter parameters (status, pipeline) and pagination parameters, but does not add details beyond schema descriptions. The mention of automatic retrieval is useful context.

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 Pipedrive deals, with filtering by status and pipeline. It distinguishes from other list tools (e.g., list_activities) by specifying the resource (deals). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from search_deals, which could also retrieve deals.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_deals or other list operations. The description only explains what the tool does, not when it is appropriate to use.

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