create_contact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses that this is a write operation and provides the required OAuth/API scope 'contact:write,' which adds useful context. However, it doesn't mention what happens on duplicates, whether the operation is reversible, or what response is returned.

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 extremely short and front-loaded: 'Create a contact' immediately conveys the operation. The second clause adds scope information without padding. It is concise, though almost too sparse.

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 two-parameter create operation with no output schema, the description is minimally viable. It tells the agent what to do and the required permission scope. However, it leaves important context unstated, such as duplicate handling and return values, so it is not fully complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no parameter-level information beyond the tool name itself. The property names 'name' and 'email' are somewhat self-explanatory, but no format, validation rules, or constraints are described. The description does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 states a clear action and target: 'Create a contact.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_mailbox, create_folder, and create_label because the resource is explicitly named. It doesn't elaborate on what constitutes a contact, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of behavior if the contact already exists. The only contextual hint is the scope 'contact:write,' which implies authorization but does not explain usage conditions.

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