crm_batch_create_leads

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states this is a creation operation (implying mutation), but doesn't disclose permissions required, rate limits, whether leads are created synchronously/asynchronously, error handling for partial failures, or what the response contains. For a batch write tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical gaps.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly despite its brevity.

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 (batch creation with nested parameter structures), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain the input format, behavioral expectations, error scenarios, or what success looks like. For a mutation tool with rich parameter schema but 0% description coverage, this is inadequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'multiple leads' but provides no details about the 'inputs' parameter structure, required fields like 'properties', optional associations, or property constraints (e.g., email format, enum values for leadstatus/rating). The description adds almost no value beyond the schema's structural definition.

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 action ('Create multiple leads') and resource ('leads'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'crm_create_lead' or 'crm_batch_create_contacts', which would require specifying this is specifically for leads rather than other CRM objects.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when batch creation is preferable to single creation (e.g., for efficiency with many leads), nor does it reference sibling tools like 'crm_create_lead' for single operations or 'crm_batch_create_contacts' for other object types.

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