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

Annotations already declare this a safe, read-only, idempotent lookup, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: business hours, online availability, and critically that SEMERO does not accept orders through AI so the client must write or call directly. That last constraint prevents an agent from attempting a transaction the tool cannot perform.

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 dense sentences: the first packs all actionable contact data up front, the second gives the use-case routing plus the no-AI-orders caveat. No filler and nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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 static, zero-parameter contact resource with no output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs to decide to call it and to relay the result. Nothing about the tool's contract is left 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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is a closed empty object, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the description correctly implies a no-argument call.

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 opens with a concrete resource (SEMERO contacts) and enumerates exactly what it returns: email, WhatsApp/phone, hours, and online availability. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like calculate_price or check_customs, which compute things rather than surface contact channels.

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 gives clear trigger conditions — ordering, exact pricing, broker consultation, manager contact — which is unusually explicit for a contact tool. The only gap is that 'get an exact price' overlaps with the sibling calculate_price without stating which one to prefer when the user just wants a number.

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