teamleader_list_deal_phases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool lists phases, sorts them by flow order, and supports an optional pipeline filter. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior or what fields are returned, which would be useful for an agent.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The main action and sorting behavior are front-loaded, and the use case is stated directly. Every sentence earns its place.

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 fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose, sorting, and filtering. It lacks explicit pagination defaults or response shape details, but the core information an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds the purpose of deal_pipeline_id ('Optionally filter by pipeline') and the overall use case, but it does not add meaningfully beyond the schema for page or page_size.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('deal phases (stages)'), and a distinguishing detail ('sorted by their order in the flow'). It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like list_deal_pipelines or list_deal_sources.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use to find phase_id for creating deals or moving them.' It also notes the optional pipeline filter. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the use case is clear enough.

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