qobrix_get_contact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return structure and verified includable associations, which is helpful. However, it omits behavior on not-found, error handling, authentication requirements, or rate limits—context a user might need. It does not contradict any annotations (none exist).

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence and numbered list, but it is lengthy. The 360° workflow steps, while useful, go beyond the immediate tool description and could distract from the core get operation. Several sentences could be trimmed without losing primary functionality.

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 simple get tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the return shape, include options, and links to related search tools. It is reasonably complete for an agent to invoke and interpret results, though some edge cases (e.g., missing UUID behavior) are not covered.

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 description adds extra value by listing 'Verified include: AssignedToUsers, User, Language, Organizations' and decoding the return object shape. The 'id' parameter meaning is already in the schema, but the verified include options are additional, actionable details beyond the generic 'Associations to expand'.

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 'Get a single contact by UUID' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it as 'the person/company detail view' from list/search tools. It explicitly positions itself within the Lead-Contact Lifecycle, making its purpose obvious.

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 for a known UUID ('detail view') and provides a detailed 360° journey with alternative tools for related data. However, it does not explicitly say when NOT to use this tool (e.g., for search) or compare with qobrix_list_contacts/qobrix_search_contacts beyond the UUID pointer.

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