List Opportunities

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint, openWorldHint), so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It adds the sales pipeline scope and hints at the return fields. It does not disclose pagination behavior, default filters, or data freshness, but those are partly covered by the schema, and the annotations lower the burden.

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-loaded with the verb and resource, and every phrase adds information. There is no filler or repetition of the title.

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 read-only list tool with three optional, well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It states the domain and previews returned fields. It does not explain the default behavior of 'status' or how 'limit' interacts with pagination, but those are specified in the input schema, so the gap is minor.

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 the schema fully documents 'limit', 'stage', and 'status'. The description does not add parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 states a clear action and resource: 'List sales pipeline opportunities/deals.' It also previews the output content ('Shows prospects, their stage, value, and next actions'). It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling get_opportunity, but the list-vs-single distinction is evident from the name and title.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives. Siblings like get_opportunity, create_opportunity, and update_opportunity_stage exist, but the description does not mention them or provide any decision criteria. The usage is only implied by the imperative 'List'.

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