create_lead

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

Annotations only declare it is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world write. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: an implicit duplicate-detection pre-check that can refuse the creation, and the allow_duplicate escape hatch. It does not say what the caller receives on refusal or on success, but the key operational hazard is disclosed.

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 tight sentences with no filler, front-loading the core action before the duplicate-detection caveat. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 9-parameter creation tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, the description covers the main behavioral risk (silent or refused duplicate creation). It omits the return shape (e.g., new lead id) and the exact refusal semantics, which are minor gaps given the schema handles field definitions.

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 33% (only source, postcode, allow_duplicate), so the description should compensate. It clarifies allow_duplicate as 'create even if a high-confidence duplicate exists', but that largely restates the schema's own description, and the 6 other parameters (including the required first_name/last_name) get no added meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a lead') and immediately adds the distinguishing behavior that it runs duplicate detection first, which separates it from the sibling find_duplicates tool. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated from the rest of the lead toolset.

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?

Gives clear context for the primary use case and discloses the condition under which the call will fail (high-confidence duplicate) plus the override flag. It does not route the agent to alternatives (e.g., find_duplicates to pre-check, or update_lead_status for existing leads), so it lacks explicit when-not/exclusion guidance.

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