accept_unsorted

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects. It discloses the core state change and optional parameters, but does not clarify what happens to the original unsorted entry, whether defaults are used for omitted fields, or whether the operation requires special permissions.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that states the action, outcome, and optional fields without repetition or filler. Every clause 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?

For a relatively simple operation with full schema coverage, the description provides enough context to invoke the tool correctly: the required UID, the state change, and optional fields are all clear. Minor gaps remain around default behavior and return value, but they do not seriously impede correct usage.

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%, so all four parameters already have clear descriptions. The description's mention of 'pipeline, status, and responsible user' mirrors the schema and adds no additional semantic nuance beyond what the schema provides.

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 names the action ('accept'), the resource ('unsorted lead'), and the outcome ('moves it into a pipeline as a real lead'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling read/list tools by describing a state transition from unsorted to real 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 usage context is implied: use this when you have an unsorted lead to convert into a real pipeline lead. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like create_lead for starting from scratch.

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