create_list_from_followup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It includes "[mutation]" to indicate a write operation, but does not describe side effects (e.g., whether existing lists are modified, permissions needed, rate limits, or return details). This is minimal transparency.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it lacks structure (e.g., separate parameter descriptions or usage notes) and could be considered slightly under-specified. Still, it is efficient with no wasted words.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not mention the return value (likely the created list's ID), prerequisites (e.g., Smart Follow-up must be enabled), or potential errors. A more complete description would clarify what the tool returns and when it fails.

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 100%, with both parameters already described (name and period with enum). The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: creating a contact list from conversations detected by Smart Follow-up. The verb "Crear" and resource "lista de contactos desde conversaciones" are specific, and the sibling tools like create_contact_list and create_list_from_inactive are differentiated by the source (Smart Follow-up).

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 context (when you want to create a list from Smart Follow-up conversations) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it or provide prerequisites. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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