search_leads

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description contributes one behavioral fact beyond the schema — result ordering ("Newest first") — but says nothing about pagination, the default limit of 20, or what an empty result looks like.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the filtering capability front-loaded and the sort behavior as a trailing qualifier. Nothing to trim.

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 no-argument-required search tool with no output schema and 40% schema coverage, the description covers the filter surface and sort order but leaves limit/pagination semantics and result shape unexplained. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 only 40%, and the description name-drops four of the five filters (text, status, state, owner) while ignoring limit entirely. The schema itself already documents the query and owner matching scope, so the description adds only marginal meaning over structured data.

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 (Search) and resource (leads) plus the filter dimensions it accepts, so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It stops short of differentiating itself from siblings such as get_lead or find_duplicates, which is the only thing keeping it from a 5.

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 lists what can be filtered but gives no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing (e.g. get_lead for a single record, find_duplicates for dedupe). Usage is only implied by the filter list.

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