search_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The term 'Find' suggests a read-only operation, but there is no disclosure about behavior such as whether it returns one contact or multiple, what happens with partial matches, or any authentication requirements. This is insufficient for a search tool.

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 concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. No extraneous information or unnecessary detail.

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?

While there is an output schema (not shown), the description fails to explain what is returned, such as a list of matching contacts or details about each contact. It omits critical context about match behavior, pagination, or error handling. For a search tool without annotations, this is incomplete.

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 0%, with no descriptions for the three string parameters. The description merely lists the parameter names (email, phone, mobile) without adding meaning beyond what is in the schema. It does not explain how they interact (e.g., OR vs AND) or expected format. At 0% coverage, the description should compensate significantly, but it does not.

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 'Find' and the resource 'contact', along with the search criteria (email, phone, or mobile). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_contact (which likely retrieves by ID) and create_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 implies usage when you have an email, phone, or mobile, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_solution_articles or other contact retrieval methods. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are given.

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