add-record-to-list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool adds records to lists, implying a mutation operation, but doesn't describe permissions required, whether the operation is idempotent, error handling, or what happens if the record is already in the list. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Add a company or person to a CRM list') and includes helpful examples ('sales pipeline, lead list, etc.') without unnecessary details. Every word earns its place, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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?

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral details like side effects, error conditions, or return values, and doesn't provide usage context relative to siblings. While concise, it fails to address key aspects needed for safe and effective tool invocation in a complex CRM environment.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters (listId, recordId, objectType, initialValues) with descriptions and an enum for objectType. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 action ('Add') and resource ('a company or person to a CRM list'), with examples like 'sales pipeline, lead list' providing context. It distinguishes from siblings like 'remove-record-from-list' by specifying addition, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'update-list-entry' or 'create-record' beyond the 'add to list' focus.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies usage for adding records to lists, but doesn't mention prerequisites, when to choose this over 'create-record' (which might create a new record vs. adding an existing one), or when to use 'update-list-entry' instead. It lacks context on appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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