CRM criar contato

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

Annotations are not provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state that the operation creates a contact and that it requires ELEVOR_ALLOW_WRITES=true, which is useful auth-related context. However, it does not explain validation behavior, duplicate handling, failure modes, or what happens on success.

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?

The definition is two short sentences, with the action presented first and the required write-flag prerequisite second. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler language.

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 write operation with a nested object parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is not complete enough. The ELEVOR_ALLOW_WRITES prerequisite is helpful, but the lack of contact-object structure and any success or failure semantics leaves a significant gap for the agent to cross before invoking the tool confidently.

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?

The input schema has one nested 'contato' object with no per-property descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only mirrors the parameter name instead of explaining which fields belong in the object, making it difficult for the agent to correctly construct a request.

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 identifies the action and resource: 'Cria contato no CRM' says it creates a contact in the CRM. This separates it at surface level from crm_criar_conta and crm_criar_atividade, though it is mostly a rephrasing of the title and does not define what a 'contato' record contains.

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 gives a prerequisite, ELEVOR_ALLOW_WRITES=true, but no guidance on when to use this tool instead of siblings such as crm_criar_conta, crm_criar_atividade, or cliente_criar. The agent is left to infer the correct usage from the tool name and sibling context.

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