teamleader_get_contact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'get' (a read operation), but adds no context about return format, error conditions, authorization requirements, or limitations. For a read tool with no annotations, this is a notable 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 low complexity (single required parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete for selecting and invoking the tool. It explains what the tool does and implies the ID parameter. However, it does not mention what 'detailed information' includes or any caveats, so it is not a 5.

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?

The schema covers the single parameter 'id' with description 'The contact ID', and schema coverage is 100%. The description's 'specific contact' aligns with 'id' but adds no extra meaning 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 'Get detailed information about a specific contact' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (contact), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like teamleader_list_contacts (list), teamleader_create_contact (create), and teamleader_update_contact (update). The phrase 'specific contact' implies retrieval by ID, which is well-defined.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you need detailed data for a particular contact identified by ID, versus listing contacts or modifying them. However, there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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