list_contacts

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses search semantics (partial match on title), account ID requirement, pagination defaults, and max take. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the raw schema.

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 moderately sized but every sentence earns its place. The purpose statement is clear and the Args section is well-structured with each parameter explained. No fluff, though the field enumeration could be considered slightly redundant if the output schema already includes it.

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 output schema exists, the description still adds valuable context: search field behavior, account ID semantics, pagination limits. It covers the key aspects an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly. Missing details like sorting or error behavior, but these are not critical for a list/search operation.

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%, but the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: search targets the 'title' field, account must be an internal ID (with pointer to list_accounts), and skip/take have clear defaults and max value. This is exactly what the agent needs.

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 'Search and list contacts' with a specific verb and resource, and lists the contact fields returned. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools (e.g., list_accounts), but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

Provides some usage context by explaining the search behavior and the account filter (including that it's an internal ID, not a company name). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_contact or other list tools.

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