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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on what a missing contact returns, whether custom attributes are included, or any auth/scope requirement.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses. It loses a point because "with its attributes" is padding that could have been replaced with genuinely useful content.

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?

For a single-record getter with no output schema and half its parameters undocumented, the description should say what is returned and how it differs from search_contacts. As written, an agent cannot confidently choose this over its siblings or predict the response shape.

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 description coverage is only 50%: the fields parameter is documented, but contact_id has no description beyond an integer minimum. The description's vague "with its attributes" does not compensate, and it never explains the fields projection parameter or its enum values.

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?

It names a specific verb and resource ("Get one contact") and the singular "one" hints at single-record retrieval, which separates it weakly from list_contacts. However, "with its attributes" is tautological filler that clarifies nothing, and the description never distinguishes it from search_contacts, contact_filter, or get_conversation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling readers (search_contacts, contact_filter, list_contacts, contact_conversations). No prerequisites, no exclusions, no routing hints of any kind.

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