list_prospects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It describes a read-oriented operation ('List'), but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or any side effects. It adds no behavioral context beyond the basic listing action.

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 and front-loaded: two short sentences that state the primary action and filtering options. No wasted words, and the status enum is provided inline 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?

For a simple list tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential use case (listing and filtering) adequately. It omits mention of the 'limit' parameter and return format, but these are either inferable from the schema or implied by the operation.

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. It explicitly mentions two of three parameters (campaign_id and status) and enumerates valid status values, which adds meaning beyond the bare schema. The 'limit' parameter is not described, but its schema constraints (default, min, max) are self-explanatory.

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 'List prospects', a specific verb+resource pair, and mentions filtering capabilities. It does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'search_prospects', but the listing vs searching distinction is implicit.

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 usage through the filter options (by campaign_id and/or status) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'search_prospects'. No exclusions or alternative mentions are present.

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