ghl_create_contact_note

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits on its own. It only states the basic action, without disclosing potential side effects, permission requirements, or what happens if the contact does not exist. The mutation nature is implied but not elaborated.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy or fluff. However, it is quite under-specified, lacking any structural breakdown of important details, making it not fully appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 the tool's apparent simplicity (3 simple parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return behavior, required permissions, or error conditions, and with no annotations to fill gaps, it leaves the agent without sufficient context for reliable invocation.

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?

The schema already describes 'body' and 'userId', but 'contactId' lacks a description and the tool description adds no additional parameter meaning. With only 67% schema coverage and no compensation from the description, the missing 'contactId' semantics remain unclear beyond its name.

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 'Add a note to a contact' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action of creating a note for a contact. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_get_contact_notes, ghl_update_contact_note, and ghl_delete_contact_note by using 'add' as the 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It lacks any contextual information about choosing this over other note-related or contact-related tools.

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