contact_get

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

No annotations provided. The description only states 'get' implying read-only, but lacks details on safety, rate limits, what happens with invalid IDs, or any behavioral traits.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence, no fluff. However, could trade some conciseness for more useful content.

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 output schema exists, the description doesn't need return details, but it lacks usage context, behavioral info, and distinction from siblings. With 5 parameters and a specific domain, more completeness is expected.

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 descriptions cover all 5 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves contacts/companies from AbraFlexi. However, it does not distinguish between contacts and companies, and the sibling tools for create/delete/update suggest this is the read operation, but there are other get tools (evidence_get, product_get) without differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like evidence_get or product_get. No mention of prerequisites, context, or alternatives.

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