Leads summary

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

Annotations mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context by noting the summary is client-side and that pagination is controlled via max_pages. It does not disclose whether totals may be partial when pagination limits are hit, but given the annotation coverage, this is a reasonable level of transparency.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose, followed by parameter-related behavior. No filler or redundancy; every word earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description doesn't detail the return format, but it explains core functionality, pipeline filtering, and pagination. The main gap is ambiguity about whether pagination limits may cause counts/price totals to be partial, which is important for a summary 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?

Schema descriptions are absent (0% coverage), so the description carries the burden. It explicitly mentions pipeline filtering (pipeline_id) and pagination via max_pages, adding meaning beyond bare integer bounds. However, it does not specify defaults or behavior when max_pages is omitted.

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 produces a client-side summary of leads with counts and price totals, optionally filtered by pipeline. It distinguishes from sibling tools like leads_list by focusing on aggregation rather than raw lead listing, though it lacks an explicit action verb.

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 this tool is for aggregate summaries rather than raw lead lists, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like kommo_sales_report, kommo_pipeline_analytics, or kommo_incoming_leads_summary. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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