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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond that, such as matching semantics, pagination behavior, ordering, or result limits.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant or wasted wording. It delivers the core action and search scope immediately.

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 simple two-parameter search tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential query semantics. It is nearly complete, though it could note how it differs from list_contacts or get_contact.

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 50%: the limit parameter is documented in the schema, while query is not. The description compensates for query by specifying that it searches name, email, or company, but it adds nothing about limit beyond the schema.

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?

Defines a specific verb and resource (search contacts) and names the searchable fields (name, email, company). It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_contacts, get_contact, or create_contact.

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 states what can be searched but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternative tools such as list_contacts for browsing all contacts or get_contact for retrieving one by identifier.

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