crm_search_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Search contacts' implies a read operation, but the description doesn't disclose whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what happens with empty filters. The complex input schema suggests significant behavioral complexity that isn't addressed in the description.

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 - just 6 words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of being under-specified for such a complex tool with 5 parameters and no annotations.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested filter structures, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. A search tool with complex filtering capabilities needs more explanation about how filters work, what properties are available, pagination behavior, and return format. The minimal description doesn't provide enough context for effective tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. The description mentions 'contact-specific filters' but doesn't explain what filterGroups, properties, limit, after, or sorts parameters mean or how they work together. With 5 parameters completely undocumented in both schema and description, this is a significant gap.

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 the tool searches contacts with filters, which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like crm_search_companies, crm_search_leads, or crm_search_objects, all of which follow the same pattern for different entity types. The phrase 'contact-specific filters' is somewhat vague about what makes them contact-specific.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention when to use crm_search_contacts versus crm_get_contact (for single contact retrieval) or crm_batch_create_contacts (for creation). There's no context about prerequisites, permissions, or typical use cases for searching versus other contact operations.

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