daily_pipeline_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the aggregated contents of the summary, making clear this is a read-style aggregation rather than a mutation, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permission requirements, rate limits, or how the 'date' parameter affects the scope.

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 front-loaded sentence with a compact list of inclusions. Every phrase adds information, and there is no redundant or filler text.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description does a reasonable job of enumerating what the summary contains. However, it leaves the 'date' parameter unexplained and does not clarify whether counts are returned as numbers, whether lists are truncated, or what format the result takes.

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 single optional 'date' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, and the tool description never mentions it. An agent cannot tell whether 'date' selects the day of the summary, defaults to today, uses UTC or local time, or how it interacts with phrases like 'today's appointments.'

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 gives a clear verb-and-resource combination ('One-call summary') and enumerates the exact content included: stage/band counts, hot unbooked leads, today's appointments, and overdue next actions. This distinguishes it from action-oriented siblings like score_lead or book_appointment, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 phrase 'One-call summary' implies the tool should be used when an agent wants a consolidated pipeline overview instead of making multiple calls. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over siblings such as list_hot_leads or get_lead, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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