leads_get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains custom field behavior (only set values appear) but omits read-only nature, error handling, or response format. Basic transparency but missing safety and side-effect details.

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?

Description is moderately concise with a clear first sentence, workflow tips, and use cases. Some repetition (e.g., 'Get lead details' example) but overall efficient and well-structured.

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, so description explains return includes all fields and custom field values. Tips on custom fields add context. Missing error handling or response format info, but sufficient for a simple 1-parameter tool.

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 already describes id as UUID. Description adds value by clarifying that lead IDs are UUIDs (not integers) and provides an example. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3, plus added context.

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 retrieves details of a specific lead by UUID, using the verb 'Get' and resource 'lead'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like leads_search and leads_list by emphasizing the UUID-based lookup.

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?

Workflow tips include using leads/search to find leads by title, and notes on custom fields. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the tips provide useful context. Lacks explicit alternative differentiation.

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