Search Contacts

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating the tool is safe and non-destructive. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the search criteria, such as pagination behavior, result ordering, or whether the query supports partial matches.

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 sentence of 8 words, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, but the brevity comes at the cost of completeness. It is not overly verbose, but it under-specifies critical information.

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 tool has 3 parameters (one required) with zero description coverage, the description is insufficient. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the lack of parameter documentation and behavioral context makes the tool incomplete for reliable agent use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it only lists search criteria (name, email, phone, company) which corresponds to the query parameter, but does not explain the 'group' or 'limit' parameters at all. The agent lacks essential information about how to use these parameters effectively.

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 'search' and the resource 'contacts', and lists specific search criteria (name, email, phone, company). This distinguishes it from other contact tools like contacts_get (which retrieves by ID) and contacts_list_groups. However, it does not specify the scope of the search (e.g., all contacts or a specific group) or mention that it returns multiple results, which could be slightly clearer.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as contacts_get or contacts_birthdays_today. The description does not mention any exclusions or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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