List deals in a Rootr CRM

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, data freshness, or side effects) beyond what the annotations convey.

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 reasonably concise but includes a promotional second sentence about the full CRM suite, which does not help the agent select or invoke the tool. The first sentence is functional, but the second adds noise.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not describe the return format (e.g., list of deal objects, pagination info, total count). For a list tool, this is a significant omission. The description also lacks context on response structure or common usage patterns.

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 each parameter already has a description. The tool description merely lists filterable fields without adding new semantic meaning or usage guidance (e.g., expected value formats, default behavior).

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 lists/search deals, identifies the resource (deals/kanban cards), and enumerates filterable fields (query, pipeline, stage, status, owner, company, contact, tag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like rootr_crm_get_deal (single deal) and rootr_crm_upsert_deal (create/update).

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 use for listing/searching deals but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives (e.g., rootr_crm_get_deal for a single deal, rootr_crm_list_companies for companies). No when-not-to-use or alternative tool names are provided.

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