superchat_get_contact

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining why a read is necessary before update_contact, clarifying that update_contact replaces full handle and attribute arrays rather than merging them.

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 sentences carry the full message with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the update-related guidance is placed second as a concise, high-value note.

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 single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and idempotence, the description is complete: it identifies the input (contact ID), the output scope (details, handles, custom attributes), and the key usage context (before update_contact). No output schema is present, but the description names the returned data categories.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of the only parameter, contact_id, with a pattern, length constraints, and an example referencing list_contacts and search_contacts. The description adds no new parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Read'), a clear resource ('one contact's details, handles and custom attributes'), and the lookup mechanism ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from list_contacts and search_contacts, which return collections, and from other get_* siblings that target different resources.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use this tool before update_contact, with a concrete reason: supplied handle and attribute arrays replace their full lists. It does not mention alternatives such as list_contacts or search_contacts, but the use-before-update guidance is specific and actionable.

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