find_contacts

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that manually provided contacts will generate and validate email addresses, but it does not explain how the 'find' behavior works (e.g., using roles), whether it writes data (e.g., adds contacts to a CRM), or what the return value looks like. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 two sentences long and front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence provides a concrete example of usage without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place, and there is no fluff.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description only scratches the surface. It does not explain the search-by-roles functionality, the relationship between creating contacts and finding them, or what the tool returns. The description is incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only restating that contacts are provided manually with names and titles. It does not elaborate on roles, contacts structure, or company_id beyond what schema descriptions already provide.

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's purpose: finding or adding contacts at a company. It also mentions the unique feature of generating and validating email addresses, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_companies or generate_email. The verb 'find or add' and resource 'contacts at a company' are specific.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios, exclusions, or why to choose it over other sibling tools. The only implied usage is that you must provide a company_id, but no explicit directions are given.

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