list_pipeline_deals_by_owner

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and parameter meanings, omitting any details about read-only nature, pagination, owner handling (e.g., deals without owners), or auth requirements. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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 two sections: a one-sentence purpose statement and a short Args list. Every sentence contributes value and the format is easy to scan, with no redundant or extraneous content.

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 a simple tool and an output schema available, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose and all parameters. The only notable gap is the ambiguity of the sort field (which fields are valid), but this is a minor omission given the schema and output schema provide additional structured context.

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 compensates by explaining all three parameters: pipeline_id is the Nimble pipeline ID, sort follows '<field>:<order>', and limit sets max deals per owner. This adds meaningful context beyond the raw schema, though the explanations are terse.

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 starts with 'List a pipeline's deals grouped by owner,' which clearly states the action (list), the resource (pipeline's deals), and the grouping (by owner). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool list_pipeline_deals_by_stage, which groups by stage. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 usage through the grouping by owner but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_pipeline_deals_by_stage or list_deals. There is no mention of exclusions or alternate approaches, so it relies on the user inferring suitability from the title.

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