teamleader_list_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully carry the burden. It discloses that filtering and pagination are optional, indicating a read-like operation, but does not mention the absence of mutations, default pagination behavior beyond the schema, sorting, or any edge cases. The behavioral depth is minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the primary action, and free of redundant detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description lacks additional context that would aid invocation, such as return format, sorting behavior, or explicit notes on pagination defaults. Given there is no output schema, some description of expected output would improve completeness. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'filtering and pagination' is a high-level summary of the parameters without adding new semantics or clarifying relationships. It adds no value beyond the schema.

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 action ('List contacts') and the resource ('Teamleader Focus'). It also specifies the scope with 'optional filtering and pagination', distinguishing it from single-contact retrieval tools like teamleader_get_contact. The verb and object are unambiguous.

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 implies usage for listing contacts with optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as teamleader_get_contact or teamleader_list_companies. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references, so guidance is merely implied rather than explicit.

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