apollo_reveal_person

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the cost of 1 export credit per call, but does not mention other behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The action 'reveal' might imply mutation but is unclear.

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 three concise sentences that front-load the purpose, provide usage context, and add cost information. Every sentence is valuable without 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 3 parameters with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, and its cost. However, it lacks details on error handling or response format, but that is expected with an output schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it repeats the ID parameter's origin but does not deepen understanding of the reveal_phone_number or reveal_personal_emails parameters.

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 'Reveal full contact info' for a person by Apollo ID, specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like apollo_search_people by requiring an ID from search results and apollo_get_person by revealing more details.

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?

It says to use person IDs from search results, providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like apollo_enrich_person or apollo_get_person, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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