get_lead_field_instructions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains that the tool returns a 'cheat sheet' with specific data types (API names, Field IDs, Picklist Option IDs). This is sufficient for a read-only tool with no parameters, though it could mention idempotency or lack of side effects.

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?

Four sentences, each delivering distinct value: action, ordering, output detail, usage. Front-loaded with primary purpose. No wasted 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?

Given zero parameters, existence of output schema, and sibling tools including create_lead, description fully covers what an agent needs: what it does, why call it first, what it returns, and how to use the result. No 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?

Input schema has zero parameters (schema coverage 100%). Baseline is 4 as per instructions. No parameter info needed in description; it correctly omits any.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get', resource 'all lead fields', and scope 'current tenant'. Distinguishes from siblings like create_lead, search_leads by emphasizing it is a preliminary step.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'CALL THIS FIRST before creating a lead' and 'Use this to build field_values for create_lead'. Also advises 'do not use static fields', providing clear when-to-use and how-to-use guidance.

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