put_address_number_address_url_email_id

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

The description lists error codes ('noent', 'exists', 'no_match'), which hint at failure modes, but provides no other behavioral details like idempotency, side effects, or required permissions. Without annotations, more transparency is expected.

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: one for purpose and one for error codes. It avoids unnecessary fluff, though more detail could be included without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to explain what 'ContactNumber' is, its relationship to address and contact IDs, or how the various parameters interact. The tool is moderately complex (7 params) but the description is too sparse.

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 86%, and the description adds no additional meaning to parameters. The baseline score is appropriate as the schema already describes most parameters adequately.

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 explicitly states the tool updates a ContactNumber by ID. It provides a clear verb and object, though the tool name is inconsistent with the description, which may cause confusion.

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 given on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like put_number_number_address_url_email_id or put_email_number_address_url_email_id. There is no context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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