reach_createNewContactsV1

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the double opt-in behavior (pending status and confirmation email), which is valuable. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as required permissions, idempotency, or error scenarios.

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 two short paragraphs. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second paragraph adds notable behavioral detail. It could be slightly more structured, but it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 create tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action and the double opt-in edge case. However, it lacks information about the response format, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., profileUuid meaning). It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema already defines all parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'basic information like name, email, and surname', but it does not explain the purpose of 'profileUuid' or 'note' beyond what the schema provides. No additional semantics are added.

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 verb (create), resource (contact), and system (email marketing). It also lists the basic fields involved. However, there is a sibling tool 'reach_createANewContactV1' with a similar name and purpose, and the description does not differentiate between them.

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 creating a contact, which is clear, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other contact-related tools (e.g., reach_createANewContactV1, reach_deleteAContactV1). No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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