smokeball_list_contacts

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

The description only mentions routing details and the argument format. With no annotations, it fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether it returns all contacts, pagination behavior, required permissions, or rate limits. The agent is left guessing about the tool's actual behavior beyond its basic function.

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 brief (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. It avoids unnecessary details, though the routing information could be considered secondary. Overall, it is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and an output schema (not shown but present), the description covers the essential function and routing. However, it could mention that the tool returns a list of contacts and possibly include a note about typical usage. Still, given the presence of an output schema, the agent can infer return structure.

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 has one parameter 'arguments' with no description, and the description merely restates it as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation'. This adds no insight into what fields or filters the arguments might contain. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 that the tool lists contacts via the Smokeball connector. The verb 'list' and resource 'contacts' are explicit. However, it does not differentiate this tool from other Smokeball list tools such as smokeball_list_matters or smokeball_list_tasks, nor from other list_contacts tools in sibling list.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like smokeball_get_contact for a single contact or smokeball_search for broader queries. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for using this tool.

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