Get a deal by id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about the CRM node and auto-linking to the knowledge graph, which informs the agent about the tool's ecosystem. However, it does not disclose what 'full detail' includes or any side effects.

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 brief with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core action. The second sentence provides context but is not essential for tool invocation. Could be slightly more concise, but overall effective.

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 read tool with one parameter and annotations present, the description covers the action and context. However, with no output schema, the description should clarify the return structure (e.g., 'full detail' is vague). The missing return details leave the agent uncertain about the response format.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a description for 'dealId' ('Deal id'). The tool description does not add further meaning to the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('fetch full detail') and the resource ('ONE Rootr CRM deal by id'). It distinguishes from list-oriented siblings by specifying 'ONE' deal. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like rootr_crm_get_company or rootr_crm_list_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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., rootr_crm_list_deals for multiple deals, or rootr_crm_upsert_deal for mutations). The description only states what the tool does, not the context for its use.

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