Busca um(a) Contatos (pessoas físicas/jurídicas: clientes, partes, advogados) por id (OData /Contacts/{id}). Use $expand para sub-recursos.
Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| ids | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| $expand | No | ||
| $select | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations cover readOnly and idempotent behavior, so description adds value by mentioning bulk support and $expand for sub-resources. No contradiction 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?
Two succinct sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasteful wording. Efficient and to the point.
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?
Provides enough for basic id fetches but lacks details on optional parameters (query, $select) and response shape. Given no output schema, more context would be beneficial, though annotations cover safety aspects.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, description must explain parameters. It covers id, ids (bulk), and $expand, but leaves query and $select unexplained. Insufficient compensation for majority of parameters.
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?
Description clearly states it fetches contacts (physical/legal persons) by id using OData endpoint, with bulk support via ids. Distinct resource and verb, differentiating from siblings like legalone_list_contacts.
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?
Implies usage for single contact retrieval by id, and bulk execution via ids. Does not explicitly contrast with list_contacts or other get_* tools, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.