get_csm_contact

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's contribution is limited. It adds the fields returned but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

One sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes a parenthetical list of key fields. No unnecessary words, efficiently conveying the tool's function.

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 single-parameter get tool, the description is adequate. It covers the purpose and output, and the schema covers input. However, it could be more complete by clarifying that it returns a single contact or how conflicts are resolved for ambiguous inputs, but given the low complexity, it is sufficient.

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 100% with a clear description of the parameter. The tool description adds value by listing the output fields, which helps the agent understand what the parameter is used for, but the schema already handles the parameter semantics well.

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 details of a customer contact, listing specific fields like name, account, phone, and email. It distinguishes itself from list_csm_contacts by focusing on a single contact's details.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_csm_contacts or other get_ tools. The description lacks context on when not to use it or what distinguishes it, forcing the agent to infer from naming conventions.

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