reach_createANewContactV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the double opt-in behavioral effect (pending status, confirmation email), which adds value. However, it fails to disclose other important behaviors such as error handling, idempotency, or authentication requirements.

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 three sentences, no redundancy, and front-loads the main purpose. The third sentence adds important behavioral context without being verbose.

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 no output schema and 4 parameters, the description provides basic purpose and one behavioral detail (double opt-in). It does not cover return values, error conditions, or prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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%, but parameter descriptions are minimal (e.g., 'email parameter'). The description adds slight value by listing 'name, email, and surname' but does not explain constraints or formats. Baseline for high coverage is 3, and the description does not raise it.

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 creates a new contact in the email marketing system with basic fields, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like reach_createNewContactsV1 (bulk) and reach_createANewContactSegmentV1 (segment creation). However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bulk creation) or when not to use it. The description only explains what the tool does, not the context of its usage.

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