Company Contact Pack

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds a note about x402 utility pricing, which discloses potential cost, a behavioral trait beyond annotations. However, it does not elaborate on other behaviors like whether the tool follows redirects or handles errors.

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, each earning its place. The first states the core purpose concisely, and the second provides important contextual information about pricing and protocol separation. No fluff or redundancy.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description explains inputs adequately but lacks details about what the 'contact pack' contains (e.g., format, fields) or any return structure. The second sentence about pricing is somewhat tangential to core functionality. Moderately 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 description coverage is 100% (both parameters documented). The description does not add additional meaning to the 'url' or 'timeout' parameters beyond what is in 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 'Build a contact pack from page contacts, forms, social links, registrar, and disclosure channels', specifying the verb 'build' and the resource 'contact pack'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like util_contact_extract and util_forms_extract by aggregating multiple sources.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'Delx Agent Utilities are separate from the free witness protocol' offers no comparative context. Sibling tools like util_contact_extract and util_forms_extract are similar, but no differentiation is made.

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