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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It flags HIGH_WRITE, states that the operation is asynchronous, returns a BackgroundJob, and advises polling for completion status. This adds substantial behavioral context beyond the schema, though side effects of copy/confirm remain unclear.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a critical async note. Every sentence carries meaningful information, and there is no redundant filler.

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?

The description captures the most important operational quirk—the asynchronous BackgroundJob return and source requirement. However, with no output schema and no explanation of copy/confirm or how to choose between list and campaign destination/source parameters, an agent may still struggle to invoke it correctly in all cases.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully identifies the source requirement via from_campaign_id or from_list_id, but it does not explain the copy and confirm booleans, nor clearly map the destination parameters. Seven parameters are left largely undocumented.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Move (or copy) one lead to another campaign or list.' This unmistakably states what the tool does and distinguishes it from update_lead, delete_lead, and add_leads by focusing on relocating a lead between containers.

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 intended use is implied by the purpose statement, and the note clarifies that a source is required. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose move_lead over similar tools like add_leads, nor any exclusion criteria or alternative routing.

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