kommo_list_contacts

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'with filters', which is vague; it does not mention pagination behavior, default ordering, whether results are partial or full objects, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema.

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 short (4 words), but it omits critical details. While there is no wasted text, the lack of structure (e.g., no explanation of filters, return format, or usage) makes it under-specified rather than concise.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and numerous siblings, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain pagination (page/limit), filtering (query/user), the response structure, or when to prefer this over dedicated search tools.

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, and the description adds no parameter-level information. Terms like 'query' and 'responsible_user_id' are left unexplained, so the agent cannot infer their semantics from the description alone.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'contacts', indicating a retrieval operation. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like kommo_search_contact_by_email or kommo_search_contact_by_phone which also retrieve contacts with filtering.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple search tools for contacts that offer more specific querying (by email or phone), but the description gives no hint about the appropriate context for this generic list.

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