freeagent_create_contact

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive. The description adds the client/supplier distinction and the requirement to supply either an organisation or personal name. It does not disclose side effects, duplicate handling, or required permissions.

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 compact and front-loaded with the verb 'Create' and the resource. The second sentence adds operational guidance without excessive fluff, making it efficient and well-structured for a two-sentence description.

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 create operation with no output schema and an empty input schema, the description leaves significant gaps: no return value, no error conditions, no permission requirements, and no formal way to provide the mentioned fields. It is not sufficient for an agent to correctly and fully invoke the tool.

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 input schema is empty, yet the description instructs to supply either an organisation name or a first/last name (or both), implying parameters that are not defined in the schema. The guidance is ambiguous and conflicts with the formal schema, providing insufficient detail for correct invocation.

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 action ('Create a contact in FreeAgent') and specifies the two use cases: a client to invoice or a supplier to record bills against. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like freeagent_list_contacts and other create tools.

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 gives clear context on when to use this tool (creating a contact for invoicing or bill recording) but does not provide explicit exclusions or mention alternative tools. It communicates the primary use case effectively without alternatives.

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