dex_list_group_contacts

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination support, which is valuable behavioral context not inferable from the schema alone. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, response format, or error conditions for a read operation.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero waste. First sentence states core purpose, second adds key behavioral detail (pagination). Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 read-only tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers purpose and pagination but misses parameter explanations, response details, and error handling. Completeness is borderline given the lack of annotations.

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 0%, so parameters are undocumented in schema. The description mentions 'groupId' implicitly ('specific group') but doesn't explain 'take' (page size) or 'cursor' (pagination token). It adds minimal value beyond what's inferable from parameter names.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('contacts that belong to a specific group'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from generic 'dex_list_contacts' by specifying group membership filtering, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'dex_search' which might also filter contacts.

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 when needing contacts for a particular group, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'dex_list_contacts' (all contacts) or 'dex_search' (filtered search). No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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