get_deals

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses default sorting (newest first), default limit (500), and available filter fields. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, error handling, or any potential side effects. Still, it provides good operational context.

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 summary paragraph, parameter list, return type, and examples. It is somewhat verbose but appropriate for the number of parameters. Could be slightly more concise but still effective.

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 15 parameters, no required params, and presence of output schema, the description covers all parameters, defaults, and provides examples. It lacks pagination details beyond limit but is generally sufficient for an agent to use 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides detailed meanings for each parameter, including allowed values for status, date format guidance, and sort options. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema fields.

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 the purpose: 'Get deals from Pipedrive with filtering options.' It specifies the verb (Get), resource (deals), and scope (with filtering). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_deal (single) and search_deals (full-text 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?

The description implies usage by listing many filter options but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_deals or get_deal. No direct guidance on when not to use it.

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