Create leads

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a non-destructive operation. The description adds that the return value includes created leads with IDs, which explains the response shape. It does not cover failure modes or partial success, but given the annotations provide the safety profile, this is acceptable.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences: action, input instruction, and output promise. Every sentence is necessary and contributes to the overall clarity.

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 simple create tool with one parameter, the description sufficiently covers purpose, input structure, and return value. It does not discuss edge cases like partial failures or validation rules, but these are not critical for the core function.

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 only parameter, 'leads', has a detailed schema description that includes examples of fields (name, price, status_id, etc.), providing 100% coverage. The tool description's 'Pass an array of lead objects' is largely redundant with the schema, so it adds minimal new meaning.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Create one or more leads'), explicitly states the operation scope, and clearly indicates the return value (created leads with IDs). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling read/update tools via its create action.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose and hence implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly exclude or contrast with the sibling kommo_leads_complex_create, which could be an alternative for complex creation scenarios. Still, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer basic usage.

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