post_contact

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description should clarify it's a safe read. However, the description's format ('{...} for a post') resembles a mutation payload, which could confuse. It adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 terse but poorly structured. The brace notation is confusing and the required parameter is tacked on at the end without clear separation. It lacks a clear statement of purpose.

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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description should at least state what information it returns (contact details). Instead, it's ambiguous and provides no context about the tool's behavior or output.

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%; post_id is fully documented in the schema. The description lists related fields but since only post_id is a parameter, it adds minimal value beyond the schema. Baseline 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 does not state what the tool does. It lists fields in braces and says '{contactText, contactMobile, shouldEnableWhatsApp} for a post' without a verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'. An agent cannot confidently determine the tool's action from this.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_post_details or comments. The description is purely a field listing.

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