build_contact_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the tool is a one-shot operation with a maximum of 3 sources, indicating it is not for large-scale use. However, it does not specify whether the operation is read-only or has side effects, nor does it detail error behavior, rate limits, or authorization 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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that front-load the core purpose ('One-shot lead list') and then briefly list the process and constraints. Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description provides a reasonable overview but omits details like the number of contacts returned, error handling, and the exact role of the 'location' parameter. For a public demo tool, it is adequately complete, but lacks depth for production use.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the purpose of 'niche' and 'category' by saying 'discovers communities for a niche+category', and clarifies the 'sources' parameter by stating 'max 3 sources'. However, it does not explain the 'location' parameter, leaving its meaning 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 tool builds a one-shot lead list by discovering communities for a niche and category, extracting contacts, and deduplicating. It specifies the output fields (name, title, company, email, location, source_url), making the purpose distinct. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'extract_contacts_from_url' or 'discover_communities', which slightly reduces clarity.

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 mentions 'Public demo — max 3 sources' which hints at a limitation but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no discussion of prerequisites, scenarios where it is appropriate, or exclusion criteria relative to sibling tools.

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