ghl_opportunity_get_lost_reason

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's additional details (endpoint, OAuth scopes opportunities.readonly, pagination) add some but not substantial behavioral context. No contradictions 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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of a title, endpoint info, OAuth scopes, and pagination guidance in a clear line-break structure. Every sentence serves a purpose with no unnecessary text.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the purpose of parameters like name, query, deleted, getCount, and the expected response format. It only addresses pagination parameters, leaving significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and outputs.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that skip and limit are for pagination and how to use them to get full result sets. Other parameters (name, query, deleted, getCount) are not elaborated beyond the schema, so minor additional benefit.

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 states 'Get lost reason' which is a specific verb-resource pair. The endpoint URL and OAuth scopes further clarify the tool's purpose. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling opportunity tools like ghl_opportunity_get or ghl_opportunity_search, so it's not a full 5.

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 pagination guidance ('pass them to page through full result sets') but lacks any context on when to use this tool versus other opportunity tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or when not to use it.

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