get_contact

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the full payload is returned unless fields is specified, and that field filtering is 'cheaper.' However, it does not address error cases, permissions, or rate limits, which are relevant for an API retrieval tool.

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 crisp sentences with front-loaded purpose and a clear, useful tip about fields. 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 presence of an output schema handles return values. The description explains how to request a subset of fields, which complements the schema. It lacks guidance on alternative tools or error behavior, but for a simple getter this is adequate.

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 description meaningfully explains the `fields` parameter's format (comma-separated keys) and its benefit. It does not elaborate on `contact_id` and `account_id`, but their names and schema types make them self-explanatory. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates.

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 it retrieves full details for a specific contact, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific contact'). It doesn't explicitly distinguish from list_contacts, but the 'specific' qualifier implies a single-record lookup.

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 gives guidance on using the fields parameter to reduce payload when checking several contacts, implying the tool is for targeted lookups. It does not mention when to use list_contacts or other alternatives, nor any exclusions.

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