Convert a lead to a company

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

Discloses key side effects: carries fields, marks lead won, records company, errors if duplicate. Annotations show destructiveHint=false, so no destruction warning needed. Adds value beyond annotations by detailing what gets transformed.

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?

Three concise sentences without redundancy. Each sentence adds distinct information: action, field mapping/options, and behavioral notes. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Covers inputs, transformation, side effects, and error condition. No output schema exists, but the description adequately explains the result (company created, lead updated). Could mention response structure, but not critical.

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?

Description explains the meaning of fields (name, website→domain, notes summary) and the createContact parameter's role. It complements the schema by contextualizing how parameters map to lead fields, exceeding schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the specific verb 'convert' and resource 'lead to a company', detailing field carryover and optional contact creation. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_lead' or 'set_lead_status' by focusing on conversion.

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?

Description implies use for qualified leads and warns of errors if already converted, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools (e.g., enrich_lead) provides indirect guidance.

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