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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description's main addition is the underlying REST endpoint, which helps with error mapping. It says nothing about what happens with an invalid or unknown code (404 behavior) or the shape of 'full data'.

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 short sentences with zero padding; the purpose is front-loaded and the endpoint reference is a compact secondary detail.

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-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint and no output schema, this is nearly complete. The only gap is that 'full data' is undefined and error behavior for a bad code is unstated.

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% and the single parameter already documents that the code comes from the matching list tool. The description's 'by code' merely restates this, adding no format or constraint detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get full data of one contact') and the retrieval key ('by code'), which distinguishes it from the sibling list tools. It doesn't name egestor_list_contacts explicitly, but 'one contact' versus a list is unambiguous.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance or alternatives; it never says to use egestor_list_contacts first to obtain the code. The only hint that a prior list call is needed lives in the schema's parameter description, not the tool description.

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