get_contacts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a read operation ('Get') and outlines searchable fields, but it doesn't mention what the response looks like, whether it's paginated, or any default behaviors beyond the limit parameter.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's function and key operations.

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 simple parameter set and lack of output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the core functionality, though it doesn't mention response format or pagination. The limit parameter in the schema partially compensates for this, making the tool usable without further clarification.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by clarifying the distinction between the query parameter (search by name/email) and the tags parameter (filter). It omits 'phone' from the schema's query description, which is a minor inconsistency, but overall it enhances understanding.

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 retrieves contacts/leads from the CRM with specific search and filter capabilities. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_contact or update_contact by emphasizing retrieval and search.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: searching by name, email, or filtering by tags. It doesn't explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the intended usage is evident from the stated search/filter options.

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