ghl_get_contact_appointments

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states it gets 'all appointments' but does not disclose pagination, ordering, whether past/future appointments are included, or the response format. The read-only nature is implied by 'get' but not explicitly confirmed.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately concise.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse to be fully self-contained. It does not explain what constitutes an 'appointment' or how results are returned, leaving the agent with incomplete information for handling the response.

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 0% and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. 'contactId' remains undefined; the phrase 'for a contact' simply restates the parameter's role without providing any additional guidance on its format, origin, or usage.

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 uses a specific verb 'get' with a clear resource 'appointments' and a scope 'for a contact'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like ghl_get_appointment (singular) and ghl_get_calendar_events.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned, but the name and description imply this tool is for retrieving all appointments associated with a contact. The context is clear enough for basic usage, but no exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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