Read Contact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, establishing the read-only safety profile. The description adds 'detailed' and 'specific' but does not disclose return format, error behavior, or what exactly constitutes 'detailed information'. With annotations covering core safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It wastes no words and is immediately understandable.

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, single-parameter read tool with safety annotations, the description is fairly complete. It lacks explicit detail about the return value or handling of non-existent contacts, but those are not critical for a straightforward read operation. The absence of an output schema means some return info would help, hence a 4 rather than 5.

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 100%, and the parameter 'contactUrl' already has a clear description ('URL or ID of the contact (from list-contacts output)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific contact' uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('specific contact'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list-contacts (which lists all contacts) and search-contacts (which searches). The word 'detailed' suggests it provides more in-depth data than a list operation.

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 implies usage when needing details on a known contact, and the parameter schema explicitly states 'from list-contacts output', giving a clear workflow context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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