get_segment_contacts

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the primary action but does not mention read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or data freshness. The presence of limit/offset parameters hints at pagination, but description does not clarify.

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 very concise (one sentence). While it is not wasteful, it lacks important details that could be added without becoming verbose. It efficiently conveys the core purpose but sacrifices clarity on parameters and usage.

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?

Given three parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and the presence of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'filter criteria' means or how segments work. The tool is part of a large set of list tools, but the description leaves ambiguity about parameter usage and behavior.

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 adds no meaning to the parameters. It does not explain segment_id (how to obtain it), limit (maximum? default behavior), or offset (paging semantics). No parameter details are provided beyond the schema names and types.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List', resource 'contacts in a specific segment', and purpose 'see who matches the filter criteria.' It indicates the tool returns contacts from a particular segment based on its filter criteria. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like list_contacts or search_contacts, though the segment focus is clear.

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?

No explicit usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_contacts or search_contacts. Usage is only implied by the name and description, lacking context for when-not or alternative suggestions.

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