duplicate_contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool copies a contact and the required conditions, but does not mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. For a mutation tool, more behavioral details would be beneficial, but the description provides the core logic.

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 two concise sentences in Spanish, each earning its place. The first sentence states the core action, and the second adds the precondition and use case. No redundancy or fluff.

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 3 required parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose and precondition. However, it lacks information about the return value (e.g., success indicator or duplicated contact ID) and error handling, which would make it more complete for an agent invoking 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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds context about the precondition and use case but does not add new semantics for individual parameters beyond what the schema offers. Baseline is 3, and this meets it.

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 verb 'copiar' and the resource 'contacto de una agenda a otra', specifying the source and destination lists. It distinguishes itself from siblings by highlighting its specific use case of moving qualified prospects between lists without re-typing data, which differs from other contact-related tools like 'add_contact' or 'update_contact'.

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 explicitly states the precondition that the contact must exist in the source list and must not exist in the destination list. It also provides a clear use case ('mover prospectos calificados'), implying when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use, which prevents a perfect score.

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