Добавить примечание

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with that ('Изменяет данные в CRM'). It adds genuinely useful context beyond the annotations by requiring the agent to surface the note text and obtain user consent before writing.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loading the action and example and ending with the consent requirement. No filler, though it is short enough that more useful detail could have been added without bloat.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, three parameters at 0% schema coverage, and a real write action, the description covers purpose and consent but leaves parameter meanings and result behavior unaddressed. Adequate but with clear gaps for the agent.

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 carry the load, but it only loosely alludes to the text and target entity. entity_id is never explained, and the entity_type values are indirectly described as deal/contact/company rather than the actual enum leads/contacts/companies, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Добавляет текстовое примечание') plus the target scope (deal/contact/company feed) and a concrete example, which separates it from the create_/update_/search_ siblings. The only wobble is that it names 'сделки' while the entity_type enum offers 'leads', a small mismatch an agent must reconcile.

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?

Gives a workflow instruction ('show the user what will be recorded and get consent') but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. Since no sibling also adds notes, usage is largely implied, which sits at the minimum-viable 3.

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