Buscar contacto en la libreta de la empresa (GAL)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds behavioral context beyond that: it performs partial-name matching, returns email addresses, and is scoped to the company's GAL. It doesn't detail result limits or error handling, but the added context is meaningful.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first directly states the tool's function, the second provides usage context. No redundant detail, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter, read-only search tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what it does, what it returns (matches with email), and when to use it. The annotations handle the safety profile, making this 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% with the 'nombre' parameter description including an example ('ej. Felipe Castillo'). The description merely restates that the search is by partial name, adding no new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 searches by partial name in the Global Address List and returns matches with their email, specifying the exact resource ('Global Address List de Integral de Empaques') and the result. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ews_search_inbox or ews_add_attendee.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Úsalo antes de invitar a alguien por nombre a una reunión, para confirmar el correo correcto.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions, but the context is clear enough for a single-purpose tool.

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