create-outlook-contact

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

Annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) provide basic behavior, but description adds no further details on creation behavior, permissions, or side effects. Missing critical context for a mutation 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?

Single sentence of 20 words, very concise with no extraneous information. Could be slightly improved with better structure, but overall efficient.

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 complex nested object schema and lack of output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain required fields, return value, or expected behavior, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 has detailed descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score applies.

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?

Description states 'Add a contact' with specific targets (root folder or another contact folder), clearly indicating the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create-contact-folder' but could be more specific about being for Outlook 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 implies two use cases (root folder or another folder) but the input schema lacks a folder identifier parameter, making the guidance misleading. No when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned.

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