update_contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states 'add or update' but does not explain upsert semantics (e.g., whether fields are merged or overwritten, what happens on conflict, or whether the operation is reversible). The description lacks depth regarding side effects or permissions needed.

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 concise with a single introductory sentence followed by a focused list of parameters. Every sentence adds value, no fluff, and the most important information (action and parameters) is front-loaded.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it could mention that the tool is an upsert (not clear on merge behavior) and note any required permissions. Still, for the tool's complexity, it is adequately 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 coverage is 0%, yet the description adds significant semantic value beyond the schema. It specifies that 'name' is used as a unique key and that 'birthday' expects YYYY-MM-DD format, which are critical details not present in the schema. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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's action, 'Add or update a contact record,' with a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., get_contacts) and other add_* tools, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as add_journal_entry or add_memory_entry. There are no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use instructions or mentions of prerequisites, leaving the agent without contextual decision support.

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