contact_list

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation (list) but does not disclose details like pagination, limits, ordering, or if results are filtered by some default scope. Without this, the agent may misjudge the behavior.

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 concise at two words, with no unnecessary information. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, the conciseness comes at the cost of missing context, but for dimension 5 it remains efficient.

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 no output schema, the description should explain what is returned (e.g., list of contacts with fields, pagination info). It lacks this, leaving the agent without crucial information to process the response. The tool is simple but the description is too sparse.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema description coverage is 100% trivially. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description is adequate for this dimension.

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 'List Contacts' clearly states the action (list) and resource (contacts). It is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like contact_search or contact_filter, which could perform similar operations with filtering capabilities.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as contact_search, contact_filter, or contact_details. The agent cannot determine the appropriate context for using list vs. search/filter.

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