List Stored Leads

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It conveys that this is a read operation, implying non-destructive behavior, but does not mention pagination, side effects, or the effect of the limit parameter. Minimal disclosure beyond the verb 'read'.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or unnecessary words. It clearly and efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description is too sparse. It does not explain that this lists all stored leads, how the limit parameter affects results, or the read-only nature. Given the presence of many sibling tools and no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in context.

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 a 'limit' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The tool description does not mention this parameter or explain its meaning. Since schema coverage is low, the description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 'Read leads stored locally by this MCP server' uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('leads stored locally'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_web and clear_stored_leads by specifying local storage.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as filter_leads or export_leads. It offers no exclusions or contextual cues for selection among siblings.

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