get_contact

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden. 'Fetch' clearly implies a read-only operation and the description discloses the data payload. It does not mention behavior for missing IDs, errors, authentication, or pagination, but for a simple one-contact fetch this is a moderate gap.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then lists the included data. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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 simple single-parameter fetch with no output schema, the description adequately covers the return content and core purpose. It could be more complete by noting not-found behavior, but overall it provides enough context for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 only confirms that the id parameter identifies the contact, adding minimal meaning beyond the schema's bare 'string' type. It provides no format, example, or constraints, so the description does not sufficiently compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 ('Fetch'), a resource ('one contact'), and the retrieval method ('by id'), and it enumerates the returned data (audience memberships, custom properties, engagement dates). It is clear and distinct from sibling search tools like find_contact, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 phrase 'by id' implies the tool is appropriate when a contact ID is already known, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over find_contact or other contact-related tools, and provides no exclusions.

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