Get lead by ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the behavioral safety is covered. The description adds the optional embedding behavior, but it does not disclose what happens for missing IDs, response format, or any rate limits. Given the simplicity and existing annotations, this is adequate but not enriched.

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 a single concise sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the action ('Get a single lead') and the primary parameter ('by its ID'). Every word contributes value, 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?

For a simple, read-only get-by-ID tool with 100% parameter schema coverage and no output schema, the description is complete. The annotations cover safety and open-world behavior, and the schema covers parameter syntax, so the agent has all necessary information to invoke the tool 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 100%, with both 'id' and 'with' having meaningful schema descriptions. The description's phrase 'embedding related entities' merely paraphrases the 'with' parameter and does not enumerate valid entity types or provide examples, so it adds little beyond the schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a single lead by its ID'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like kommo_leads_list (list all leads) and kommo_leads_search (search). The mention of optional embedded entities adds additional scoping beyond a generic 'get lead'.

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 implies when to use this tool: fetch one lead when the exact ID is known, possibly with related entities embedded. It does not explicitly name alternatives like kommo_leads_list or kommo_leads_search, nor does it state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous for a get-by-ID operation.

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