Create Client Contact

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which is consistent with a creation operation. The description adds a usage example and the minimum requirement but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., duplicate handling, validation rules) or beyond basic behavior.

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 short (two sentences in English and Spanish) and front-loaded with the key action and constraint. The bilingual repetition is a minor inefficiency, but it remains concise overall.

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?

With 6 parameters (2 required) and an output schema present, the description provides a minimal example and required field. However, it lacks context on what the response contains, validation constraints, or error conditions, leaving gaps for a creation tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by providing an example with sample values (e.g., 'clientId=abc123, name=Ana Garcia'), which helps clarify usage beyond schema alone.

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 uses a specific verb 'Add' and resource 'new contact person to a client', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'update_client_contact' and 'delete_client_contact'. The example further reinforces the purpose.

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 states 'Requires a name at minimum' but does not explicitly guide on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update or delete). No explicit 'when-not' or alternative references are provided.

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