Create Relay Contact Request

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation. The description adds that the action is a request directed at a Relay user and involves the authenticated Agent, but it does not disclose side effects, notification behavior, or failure semantics. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence with no filler. However, the term 'premium-handle Agent' introduces unexplained jargon that reduces clarity.

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 one-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description should clarify what 'handle' refers to and what happens after the request is made. It only provides high-level intent, leaving the agent without enough operational detail to invoke the tool confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description never mentions the 'handle' parameter, what it represents, or how to format it. Since the schema only provides a pattern and length constraints, the agent must infer whether the handle is the recipient, the sender, or something else entirely.

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 identifies the action ('Ask a Relay user to add...') and the resource (the authenticated premium-handle Agent). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like relay_send_message or relay_set_contact_card, though the term 'premium-handle Agent' is somewhat opaque.

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 implies the tool is used when the agent wants to initiate a contact relationship with a Relay user. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over related tools, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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