Enrich a lead

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating 'only provided fields are set', indicating a partial update and idempotent behavior. It aligns with the idempotentHint and destructiveHint annotations. However, it does not mention permissions or side effects, but annotations already cover safety.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence clearly defines the action and lists fields; the second provides workflow guidance. Perfectly concise.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: what it does, when to use it, which fields are involved, and the workflow. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 only 8%, but the description explicitly lists 11 of the optional fields and explains that they are 'website-sourced details'. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions and adds meaning about the purpose of each parameter.

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 states the verb 'record' and the resource 'website-sourced details on a lead'. It lists the specific fields that can be set and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'pull_lead_website' by specifying that this tool is for persisting extracted data.

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 description explicitly instructs to 'Use the pull_lead_website prompt to fetch + extract these from the lead's site first, then persist them here.' This provides clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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