Create Pipeline Item

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behaviors: custom_fields are written verbatim and ID-keyed writes ignored, custom_field_names are case-insensitive and validated, status_name auto-resolves, and run_automation triggers side effects like emails/tasks. It lacks explicit permission/error details but goes well beyond the schema.

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 well-structured with a clear opening statement, a numbered prerequisite list, and short explanatory bullets. Every sentence adds value—no filler—making it easy to scan and digest.

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?

Covering prerequisites, custom field behavior, automation, and name resolution, this is thorough for a creation tool with no output schema. It omits response format or error expectations, but those are not required by the schema and the description gives enough to invoke correctly.

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 input schema already documents all parameters and their mutual exclusions (status_id/status_name, custom_fields/custom_field_names). The description adds semantic nuance by explaining the write behavior and validation for custom fields, plus the name-based resolution advantage, which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 states 'Create a new pipeline item attached to a contact' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like edit_pipeline_item, get_pipeline_item, and delete_pipeline_item by focusing on creation and attachment.

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 provides explicit prerequisites with execution order (get_pipelines, get_pipeline_item_schema, search_contacts) and notes optional automation behavior. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the context is strong enough for correct use.

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