add_contact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses idempotency and enrichment from prior jobs, but omits other critical traits such as permission requirements, error states, or synchronous behavior. For a mutation tool, more details on side effects are needed.

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 concise with only two sentences, each earning its place. The first sentence states the primary action, and the second adds important behavioral details (enrichment, idempotency). No fluff or repetition.

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 tool's relative simplicity and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: addition, enrichment, idempotency. However, it lacks info on return values, error handling, or required permissions. Since sibling tools exist, basic completeness is achieved but not exhaustive.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that npub identifies the provider and that name/note are updatable on re-call, but does not explain their purpose or constraints beyond maxLength. This adds some meaning but is insufficient for full understanding.

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 'Add a provider to the active agent's contacts list' with a specific verb (add) and resource (contacts list). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_contact and list_contacts by focusing on addition behavior, including the enrichment and idempotent update 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?

The description implies usage when adding a contact, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like remove_contact or list_contacts. There is no guidance on when not to use this tool or refer to siblings. The context is clear from the action, but lack of explicit exclusions lowers the score.

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