create_contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions deduplication is enforced, which is a key behavior. But it does not address authentication requirements, rate limits, whether it is a destructive operation, or what happens on duplicate (error vs. update). The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 clear sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds key details (FREE, deduplication, minimum requirements). Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given 14 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the most important aspects (purpose, deduplication, required fields). However, it lacks information about response format, error handling for duplicates, and the effect of optional parameters like account_id or phone_numbers on the creation process. It is reasonably complete but has gaps.

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 71%, and the description adds critical context beyond the schema: it clarifies that deduplication is enforced (run_dedupe=true) and that either email or organization_name is required in addition to first_name and last_name. This provides guidance on parameter combinations not evident from the schema 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 tool creates a new contact in Apollo CRM, and the context of sibling tools like 'bulk_create_contacts' and 'update_contact' helps distinguish it. The verb-create and resource-contact are explicit.

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 specifies required minimum fields (first_name, last_name, and email or organization_name), indicates deduplication is enforced, and mentions it is FREE. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like bulk_create_contacts or search_contacts for finding existing contacts.

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