yeastar_list_company_contacts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a read-only list operation and clarifies the directory scope, but it does not describe pagination behavior, default page size behavior, or what the returned contact data looks like.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the main purpose and then adds a valuable parenthetical distinction. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple list tool with fully documented pagination parameters, the description adequately conveys the object being listed and the boundary between company contacts and personal phonebooks. The absence of an output schema means return values are not specified, but this is a minor gap for this type of directory-listing operation.

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 already provides 100% description coverage for both parameters, page and page_size. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond that already present in the schema, so the baseline score of 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 verb 'List' and the resource: the company-wide contact directory shared by all extensions. It explicitly distinguishes this from individual extension personal phonebooks, which removes ambiguity about the tool's scope.

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 communicates that this tool is for company-wide shared contacts and explicitly notes that personal phonebooks are not exposed by this connector. It provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not name alternative tools or give an explicit 'use this when...' directive.

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