Contacts Create Contact

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context such as what the tool creates, how it handles duplicates, or any permission requirements. The phrase 'delegated Apple domain tool' discloses nothing about observable behavior.

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 single sentence is short but entirely generic, merely identifying the tool as delegated and exposed without adding useful information. This is under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 tool that creates contacts with six parameters and no usage guidance, the description is far from complete. It lacks even a basic statement of what the tool does, parameter examples, or any context about when it should be invoked.

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 provides no parameter information. The agent must rely solely on property names like first_name, emails, and phones, with no explanation of required combinations, value formats, or the meaning of the ContactMethod label/value structure.

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 says only that the tool is a 'Delegated Apple domain tool' and quotes the tool name, but it never states what the tool actually does, such as creating a contact. The purpose is inferable only from the tool name and title, not from the description itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like contacts_update_contact, contacts_delete_contact, or apple_prepare_unique_contact. The description does not mislead, but it provides zero context for selecting this tool over alternatives.

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