Create a Rootr CRM node

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

Annotations indicate non-readonly and non-destructive. The description adds that the CRM node is auto-linked into the knowledge graph, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function, the second elaborates on optional features. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description does not explain return values or output, which is a gap given there is no output schema. For a complex creation tool, return info would be helpful. Otherwise, it covers the input side well.

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%, but the description adds meaning by explaining high-level intent (seeding pipelines, fields with sane defaults) and clarifying that stages have probability/color, which aids understanding of nested objects.

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 creates a new CRM node with companies, contacts, multi-pipeline deals, activities, and tasks. It distinguishes from sibling tools like rootr_crm_update or rootr_crm_get by focusing on creation.

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 explains that custom pipelines and fields are optional with sane defaults, effectively telling when to use these parameters. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives, which is partially mitigated by sibling context.

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