get_wallet_contact

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the conditional behavior (returning all contacts if phone omitted) but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, does not modify data, or require any specific authentication. It also lacks details on response format or potential errors.

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?

Two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. The primary action is stated first, followed by the conditional behavior. Every sentence adds relevant information.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's return behavior (balance for a specific contact or list of contacts with balances). It covers the main functionality but could be improved by mentioning the output structure or format. It is complete for a simple query 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The tool description adds value by explaining the effect of omitting 'phone' (returns all contacts with balances), which goes beyond the schema's mention of its optionality. This clarifies the functional difference in 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 tool consults a contact's balance in an electronic wallet, and distinguishes behavior when phone is omitted (returns all contacts with balances). It uses a specific verb 'consulta' and resource 'saldo de un contacto'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'check_balance' or 'get_contacts'.

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 provides guidance on when to omit the phone parameter to get all contacts with balances. It does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives among sibling tools, but the conditional behavior is clearly explained.

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