get_contact_score

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'get all score values', implying a read-only operation with no side effects, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication needs.

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 description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, achieving maximum conciseness with no wasted words.

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 is simple with one parameter and an output schema (which documents return values). The description covers the purpose adequately but lacks parameter guidance, which is important for a single required field. It is minimally sufficient.

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% and the description does not add any meaning beyond the schema's minimal structure. The required contact_id parameter is not described at all, leaving the format or expected value ambiguous.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'all score values for a contact', with the purpose 'see how hot/qualified a lead is'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_deal_score (which deals with deals) and list_scores (which lists all scores).

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 implies usage when evaluating lead quality, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives. Among sibling tools, get_deal_score and list_scores are related but for different resources, yet no exclusions are given.

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