intelx_phonebook

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-annotation context: it is asynchronous (returns a search ID, not results) and requires INTELX_API_KEY for authentication.

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 compact sentences, the search scope front-loaded and the async/auth constraints trailing. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating the return is a search ID rather than result data, plus the API key prerequisite. With 100% schema coverage and annotations covering safety, an agent has nearly everything needed; only the follow-up tool for fetching results is unstated.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'term', 'target' (with value meanings) and 'max_results' with defaults and bounds. The description's mention of 'emails, domains, URLs' loosely maps to the target enum but adds no syntax or format guidance, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Initiate a phonebook search on IntelligenceX') and describes the covered data types (emails, domains, URLs). 'Initiate' plus 'Returns search ID' makes the async two-step nature explicit, which distinguishes it from the plain intelx_search sibling, though it never names a sibling outright.

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 phrase 'Returns search ID' implies the intended workflow (initiate here, then collect results via intelx_phonebook_results), but no alternative or when-not-to-use condition is stated. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out, and the relationship to intelx_search is left ambiguous.

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