wealthbox.opportunities.create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Create opportunity' without detailing side effects, permissions, idempotency, or what happens on success. There is no information about authentication, rate limits, or the response format.

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 extremely concise, consisting of one sentence and an example JSON object. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and basic payload structure, with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters, a nested body object), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain the body parameter, the relationship between top-level fields and body, or any return behavior, leaving major gaps for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 schema has zero description coverage for its eight parameters, and the description's example only illustrates four of them (name, pipeline_id, stage_id, amount). It does not explain the body parameter or other fields, leaving significant ambiguity about how to structure a valid request.

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 tool's purpose with the verb 'Create' and resource 'opportunity', making it explicit that this creates a new opportunity. The example with 'new deal' reinforces the resource type and distinguishes it from sibling tools like opportunities.update or opportunities.list.

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 stating 'Create opportunity' and providing a concrete example, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it. The example serves as basic usage guidance, but there is no mention of conditions or exclusions.

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