Enroll leads in a sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: the 1,000-lead cap, rejection of invalid emails / missing variables / suppressed addresses, idempotency ('re-enrolling a lead is a no-op'), and credit reporting. It does not say whether a batch with some invalid leads is partially enrolled or fully rejected, nor does it mention auth or rate limits.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by validation/idempotency behavior and the credit note. No 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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description needs to stand alone, and it partially does. The key gap is partial-failure semantics for a batch of up to 1,000 leads, plus no indication of auth/permission requirements.

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% across 2 parameters, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'variables' are per-lead template variables, but sequenceId is never explained and the email variable shape is left entirely to the schema.

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 gives a specific verb+resource with scope: 'Enroll up to 1,000 leads with their template variables.' It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it never names the inverse sibling stop_enrollment or otherwise differentiates itself from the surrounding enrollment tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose (enroll leads into a sequence) but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance. Given siblings like stop_enrollment and check_lead, a routing hint would have been cheap and valuable.

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