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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the description only needs to add context. It does disclose the shape of the returned record (address, phone, email, stats) and the underlying endpoint, but says nothing about behavior for a missing/invalid id or what 'stats' actually contains.

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, front-loaded with the resource and returned fields. The API endpoint reference is borderline filler for an agent but is compact and aids mapping to Kledo docs.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return value; it names the top-level fields but leaves 'stats' opaque and gives no error semantics. Adequate for a simple single-record fetch, but not complete.

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 100%, so 'Record id.' and '1 = include stats.' are already documented in the schema. The description's '(optionally) stats' merely restates the include_stats parameter without adding meaning such as which statistics are returned or their cost.

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 one contact') and enumerates the fields returned plus the optional stats flag. It implicitly contrasts with kledo_list_contacts by specifying a single record, but never names the sibling list tool explicitly.

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 only usage hint is the parenthetical '(optionally) stats'. There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus kledo_list_contacts, nor any precondition such as needing a known contact id.

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