Merge Contact Lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the tool creates a new list and describes merge types, but it fails to disclose side effects (e.g., whether source lists are modified, permission requirements, or if duplicates are handled). This is a significant gap for a creation tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word adds value, with no redundancy. It is efficient and well-structured.

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 tool with 4 parameters, all described in schema, and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral nuance (two merge types). It could mention that source lists must exist and are not modified, but overall it is fairly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description's added value is limited. It explains 'mergeType' (window vs materialized) beyond the enum values, which is helpful. However, it does not elaborate on 'name' or 'slug' beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'creates a new list by merging multiple source lists' and distinguishes between 'window merge' (virtual union) and 'materialized merge' (static copy). This sets it apart from sibling tools like 'neuron_create_contact_list' which likely creates a single empty list.

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 you have multiple lists to combine into one, but it does not explicitly state when to use 'window' vs 'materialized' or when not to use this tool (e.g., if merging is not needed). No alternatives mentioned.

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