Create estimate

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

The annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds the account-dependent estimate-number prerequisite and date format constraint, but it does not disclose side effects like applying saved defaults or what happens on success. No contradiction with 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 the core purpose front-loaded and the prerequisite placed immediately after. No filler, no restating of the schema, and every clause earns its place.

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?

The description covers the basic create flow and the estimate-number prerequisite, which is enough for simple invocations. However, given 19 parameters, openWorldHint, and no output schema, it leaves important context unstated, such as how applyDefaults affects saved settings and what the tool returns.

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?

With 53% schema description coverage, most parameter semantics come from the schema. The description mostly repeats what the schema already says for estimateNumber, issueDate, and expiryDate, adding only the sequencing hint 'get ... first.' It does not compensate for the undocumented optional business/contact override parameters.

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 first sentence states a specific verb ('Create'), resource ('estimate/quote'), target ('for a contact'), and content ('with line items'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ghl_update_estimate or ghl_generate_estimate_number, and the parenthetical 'quote' removes ambiguity.

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 provides a concrete conditional workflow: if the account requires an estimate number, call ghl_generate_estimate_number first. This gives useful sequencing guidance, though it does not explicitly contrast this tool with update/send/delete estimate siblings.

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