update_lead_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions updating status but does not reveal side effects, authentication requirements, or whether the operation is destructive. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. No unnecessary words.

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 simple update tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but lacks guidance on required fields, error handling, or status validation. Given no annotations, it is minimally adequate but has 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?

The description adds value by listing example status transitions (new → contacted → qualified → closed), which clarifies the expected values for the status parameter beyond what the schema provides. However, leadId parameter lacks description in both schema and description.

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 ('Update the status of a lead') and provides an example transition flow, making it easy to understand the tool's purpose. It is distinct from sibling tools that deal with other resources like posts or categories.

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 implies use when changing a lead's status, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives. The context is clear enough for a simple update operation.

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