Manage Contact Group

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

The description lists the four actions (create, update, delete, modify_members), which aligns with the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). It adds context about the scope of operations beyond annotations, but does not detail side effects or authorization needs.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and consolidation, with zero wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description is sufficiently complete for a consolidated tool. It covers all actions and indicates replacement of previous tools.

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 provides parameter meanings. The description does not add extra semantic value beyond grouping the actions.

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 tool's purpose: Create, update, delete a contact group, or modify its members. It also explicitly mentions that it is a consolidated replacement for four previous tools, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 indicates that this tool replaces create_contact_group, update_contact_group, delete_contact_group, and modify_contact_group_members, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other manage_* tools like manage_contact or manage_contacts_batch, which might be siblings.

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