leads_search

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

Discloses that it is a wrapper with narrower OAuth scope and mentions result_score for relevance. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only behavior through 'search' but could explicitly state non-destructive nature.

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?

Well-structured with a brief summary, followed by workflow tips and common use case examples. Every sentence adds value and the information is front-loaded.

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?

Covers pagination, filtering, exact match, and field selection. Lacks explanation of output format but no output schema exists. Adequately complete for a search tool with 8 parameters.

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 already covers 100% parameter descriptions (baseline 3). Description adds value beyond schema with workflow tips like minimum 2 characters for term, max 2000 leads for filters, and default fields behavior.

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 'Search leads by title, notes, and custom fields' and specifies it is a wrapper of /v1/itemSearch with narrower OAuth scope. This differentiates it from sibling tools like deals_search or universal search.

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?

Provides detailed workflow tips including minimum character requirements, exact_match behavior, filtering by person_id/organization_id, fields selection, and pagination. Includes common use cases with example JSON. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative lead tools like leads_list.

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