Set lead status

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the behavioral detail that it records the update time, which is valuable beyond annotations.

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 zero waste. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. Appropriate for a simple status update tool.

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 three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key behavior (status transition and time logging). It doesn't mention return values or state constraints, but the annotations provide safety profile, making this adequate.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It enumerates the valid status values but does not explain the 'id' or 'project' parameters beyond what the schema provides. The description partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 specific verb and resource ('move a lead along the pipeline') and lists the exact allowed statuses ('new/contacted/qualified/won/lost'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like convert_lead or enrich_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 description implies usage when updating lead status but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or context for deciding between sibling tools are provided.

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