update_deal_stage

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

Annotations declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, closed-world write operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as side effects, permission requirements, or reversibility.

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 with no wasted words. It communicates the core action efficiently.

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's complexity (two required parameters, one enum) and the absence of schema descriptions, the description is incomplete. It relies on annotations and the output schema for safety and return details, but fails to provide parameter semantics or usage context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention 'deal_id' or 'stage', nor does it clarify the enum values or their meanings, leaving the schema's enum as the only semantic aid.

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 states a clear verb ('Move') and resource ('a deal to a new pipeline stage'), making the action understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools, though none directly overlap with this operation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or contexts. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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