Create Contact

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read, non-destructive mutation, so the description adds value with duplicate-checking behavior, required API key, and cost. It does not specify what happens when a duplicate is found, but the stated behaviors go beyond what annotations convey.

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 short and front-loads the primary purpose. The remaining sentences each add useful operational information: duplicate checking, name alias, cost, and auth requirement. No filler or redundant restating of the title.

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?

Despite having an output schemaable, the tool has nine parameters with mostly undocumented semantics and no usage guidance versus sibling contact tools. The description covers auth and duplicate checking but leaves too many gaps for reliable invocation in edge cases.

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 only 22%, with request_id and idempotency_key already explained in the schema. The tool description adds no meaning for name, tier, email, notes, phone, aliases, or relationship, leaving the agent with only raw types and a required name.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Add a Dayze Contacts record'. This clearly distinguishes create_person from siblings like create_place and add_person_alias. The duplicate-check note adds useful behavioral context without muddying the core purpose.

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 does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_person, merge_people, or add_person_alias. 'Checks duplicates first' hints at a creation workflow, but there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling handles related cases.

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