ghl_opportunity_add_followers

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and destructiveHint=false (non-destructive). The description adds no behavioral details beyond 'Add Followers', such as success responses, error conditions, or side effects. It does not contradict 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 extremely concise (single line with endpoint and scopes). While efficient, it lacks structure or front-loading of key decision-making information for an AI agent.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description omits typical outcomes (e.g., success, duplicate follower handling, errors). For a mutation tool with nested parameters, the description feels incomplete for reliable agent selection.

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% and the parameters (id, body.followers) are well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 'Add Followers' and includes the endpoint and OAuth scopes, making it obvious it adds followers to an opportunity. The sibling tool ghl_opportunity_remove_followers provides clear differentiation. However, the description is terse and relies on the name itself.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., remove followers) or prerequisites like needing the opportunity ID. The description does not provide context about typical scenarios or limitations.

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