Search Contacts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavior beyond that: result rows carry id and addressBookId, and truncated result sets set hasMore, telling the agent to refine the query rather than assume an exhaustive answer.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then workflow, then return shape in three compact clauses with no wasted wording. The clause 'A cut list sets hasMore: refine the query' is telegraphic enough to read slightly awkwardly, but it is not padded.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the return-shape burden; it names the key row fields and the pagination signal, which is what an agent needs to continue. It omits the remaining contact fields returned per row, a minor gap for a search tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it by tying truncation (hasMore) to the result cap and clarifying that the returned id is the contactId used by the contact tools. It adds little on 'format' beyond the schema's own enum documentation.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Find contacts') plus the matching semantics (words matching email, name or organization) and can be told apart from getContact (id lookup) and createContact (creation) without opening any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit use case with an alternative: 'Search before createContact to avoid duplicates.' It does not say when to prefer getContact or another listing tool, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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