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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure, yet it does not clarify whether removal is a soft delete or hard delete, whether unspecified fields are preserved on update, or whether removal is reversible. Calling the tool 'change or remove' signals mutation but leaves the important behavior opaque.

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?

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but it is too thin for a seven-parameter mutation tool. Conciseness is achieved at the cost of operational clarity, which is a significant tradeoff here.

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?

The tool has no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, so the description is the only source of behavioral detail. It identifies the operation but omits update semantics, removal semantics, and return/error behavior, leaving the definition incomplete for a mutation operation.

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 0% across seven parameters, so the description must compensate. It only loosely implies edits to contact fields and a removal option; it does not explain 'removed', 'is_primary', required 'contact_id', or partial-update semantics such as whether omitted fields are cleared or left intact.

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 states a specific verb pair ('change or remove') and resource ('one contact of a customer'), making it clearly distinguishable from customers_contactAdd. It does not explicitly name the sibling, but the operation and object are 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus customers_contactAdd or customers_update, nor any prerequisites such as needing an existing contact_id. The only implied usage is that removal is handled here rather than by a dedicated delete tool.

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