Создать сделку с контактом

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses required environment variables (AMOCRM_DOMAIN, AMOCRM_TOKEN), automatic amoCRM rate-limit compliance, contact-merging behavior with merged_with_existing=true, and the need to show the user what will be written and obtain consent. These are substantial operational details not captured by the annotations.

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 dense and somewhat run-on, but it is front-loaded with the core create action and each sentence carries relevant information. For an 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the length is largely justified.

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 the complexity, high schema coverage, and absence of an output schema, the description is complete: it covers creation scope, defaults, auth requirements, rate limits, merge behavior, return identifiers, alternatives, and user-consent expectations.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds useful semantics: pipeline_id/status_id default to the first stage of the main pipeline, IDs come from crm_account, and the note parameter adds a note. It does not add much beyond schema for every parameter, so 4 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: creates a deal together with a new contact, company, and tags, and optionally adds a note. It also names sibling tools and distinguishes this creation tool from crm_update_lead and crm_find_contact, so an agent can route correctly.

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?

It explicitly says to use crm_update_lead for modifying an existing deal and to check crm_find_contact first to avoid duplicates. It also explains the default pipeline/status behavior when pipeline_id/status_id are omitted.

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