List Contacts with Auto-Reply Enabled

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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by explaining the name resolution logic (Google Contacts with WhatsApp fallback) and the exact fields returned. Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior, so the description complements them well.

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 concise with two sentences: the first states the purpose and name resolution, the second details the return structure. No wasted words.

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 simple parameterless tool, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the output structure, though it might be missing details like sorting or pagination, but those are not critical for this query.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate given the empty input schema.

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 lists contacts with auto-reply enabled, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('contacts with auto-reply'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like whatsapp_auto_reply_enable and whatsapp_list_contacts.

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?

While the purpose is clear, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use whatsapp_list_contacts instead. The usage context is implied but not directly addressed.

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