SmartProspect: search analytics and credit balance

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

The description adds safety declarations beyond annotations, notably 'may consume SmartProspect credits: no' and 'free and read-only,' which are not in the annotations. It also discloses the endpoint. No contradictions with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint 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?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose and organized logically. The safety line is somewhat redundant with annotations but adds credit-consumption context; otherwise, each sentence serves a 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?

Given the simple one-parameter tool with output schema and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, usage timing, safety, and the optional parameter effectively. The 'before any credit-consuming call' guidance completes the contextual picture.

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 schema already describes filter_id, but the description adds that passing it yields per-filter metrics in addition to aggregate figures, clarifying the default behavior. This subtle enrichment goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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 tool returns SmartProspect credit balance, limits, and leads found/emails fetched metrics. It uses a specific verb ('Return') and names the resource and scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_reply_analytics.

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 advises reading this tool before any credit-consuming call, establishing a clear use case. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context of a free, read-only pre-flight check is evident.

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