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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful behavioral detail that results are delivered as a single offset/limit page, but says nothing about match semantics, ordering defaults, or error behavior beyond that.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core action front-loaded; no filler. The phrase 'documented sorting' is slightly vague and the endpoint reference is marginally redundant, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema and no required parameters, the essentials (a paged list of contacts, filterable by name/email, sortable) are present. The remaining gap is search-matching semantics and what a contact record contains, which is minor for a read-only listing.

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 only 29%, so the description carries extra burden, and it does partly compensate by grouping first_name/last_name/email under 'name/email search' and sort_by/sort_dir under 'sorting'. However, it never explains matching rules (exact vs partial, case sensitivity) or how the filters combine, leaving most of the seven parameters underspecified.

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 (list contacts) plus the capabilities of name/email search and sorting, and even names the underlying endpoint GET /v1/contacts. It separates the tool from create_contact clearly, though it never explicitly distinguishes it from the near-identical sibling list_property_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?

'One offset/limit page' implies a paged-listing usage pattern, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison against sibling list tools such as list_property_contacts or list_contact_roles. The caller must infer the context entirely.

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