contact_filter

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits. There is no mention of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return behavior, which is critical for a tool with a complex nested input 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?

The description is extremely short (two words), but brevity without substance is under-specification, not conciseness. It does not front-load key information; it simply wastes the available space.

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 the complexity of the tool (2 parameters, one being a nested array of objects with multiple fields and enums), the description is completely inadequate. There is no output schema, and the description provides no context for the response or pagination behavior.

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 0%, and the description adds zero meaning to the parameters. Although the schema itself defines properties and enums for filter operators, the description fails to explain how these parameters should be used, the role of page, or the structure of payload.

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 'Contact Filter' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without specifying the verb, resource, or scope. It provides no actionable information about what the tool does or how it differs from sibling tools like contact_list, contact_search, or conversation_filter.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many contact-related siblings (contact_list, contact_search, contact_create, etc.), the lack of context leaves agents without any decision support.

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