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

The description discloses important authentication requirements, which is useful since no annotations are present. However, it does not describe what happens on missing/invalid contactId, what response shape to expect, or whether the operation is strictly read-only beyond the verb 'Get.'

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 short, front-loaded, and contains no filler. Each sentence contributes either the core purpose or the key call constraint (authentication and required parameter).

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 get-by-ID tool, this is minimally adequate: it names the resource, the required parameter, and the auth requirement. But with no output schema and no annotation context, the description omits useful details about response contents, error behavior, and the OAuth vs sessionKey distinction that the schema only partially covers.

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?

The description only restates 'Required: contactId (string),' which duplicates the schema's required/type declaration and adds no meaning about how to obtain or use the contactId. It does not mention the sessionKey parameter at all, leaving the schema's sessionKey description as the only real guidance for that parameter.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about a specific contact.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list/create/update/delete contact tools and implies a lookup action by contactId.

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?

It provides clear context: use this when you need detailed information for one specific contact. It does not explicitly name alternatives like listContacts or getContactsForDomain, but the 'specific contact' framing gives enough direction for an agent to select it over list-style siblings.

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