search_contacts

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only and fuzzy-search behavior. However, it omits pagination details (defaults for skip/take) and no mention of result format or limits beyond schema.

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?

Exceptionally concise: two short sentences front-load the key action and safety property. No 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?

For a simple tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose but lacks detail on pagination behavior, expected result structure, and when to use exact vs fuzzy search. Adequate but not complete.

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?

Only the 'search' parameter has a schema description (free-text). The description redundantly mentions 'free-text string' but adds no new meaning. Skip and take are completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving 2/3 parameters with no semantic guidance.

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 performs fuzzy search on contacts using free-text. It distinguishes from sibling 'find_contact' by implying approximate matching, but does not explicitly contrast.

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 is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives like find_contact or get_contact_notes. The read-only hint is useful but insufficient for decision-making.

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