create_lead

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects and outcomes, yet it only restates the create action and input requirements. It says nothing about response format, permissions, idempotency, or consequences of creating duplicate leads.

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 short sentences front-load the core action and then list the key input constraints. Every word contributes; there is no filler or repetition.

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 straightforward create operation with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally sufficient: it names the required field and signals which optional fields are available. However, since there is no output schema or annotations, the absence of any mention of return values or failure behavior leaves a notable gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a little value by grouping parameters into required vs optional and using friendly labels ('pipeline', 'status', 'responsible user'), but it does not deepen understanding beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific action ('Create'), a distinct resource ('lead (deal)'), and the system ('amoCRM'). The name alone already distinguishes it from siblings like create_contact and create_company, and the description reinforces the target resource.

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 tool's purpose statement makes it clear it is for creating leads, and there is no competing create-lead sibling, so the appropriate use case is unambiguous. It adds a prerequisite ('Requires a name') and lists optional fields, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as create_contact or create_company.

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