reach_assignContactsToATagV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently notes that work is queued, so success means accepted rather than finished, and that already-tagged contacts are left alone (idempotency). This is valuable behavioral context beyond a simple mutation description.

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 sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, then explains parameter usage and behavioral nuances, each sentence earning its place.

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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core usage modes (specific vs. all contacts), queue semantics, and idempotency. It could mention potential errors or that exactly one of contact_uuids/all_contacts should be provided, but the essential information is present.

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?

While the schema already covers all parameter names and basic descriptions, the tool description adds semantics by clarifying the relationship between contact_uuids and all_contacts: one targets specific contacts, the other targets all, and contact_uuids is required unless all_contacts is true. This goes beyond the schema's individual field descriptions.

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 the tool's action: 'Assign a tag to many contacts at once.' It specifies the resource (contacts) and the scope (many at once), distinguishing it from the singular sibling reach_assignAContactToATagV1 and other contact-management tools.

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 provides clear usage context: pass contact_uuids for specific contacts or all_contacts to target every contact. It does not explicitly name alternatives for single-contact assignment, but the 'many contacts at once' phrasing implies the bulk-use case and separates it from the singular sibling.

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