reach_listSegmentContactsV1

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

No annotations provided; description merely states retrieval and filtering without disclosing behavioral traits like pagination details, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The presence of pagination parameters in the schema is not explained in terms of behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences. First sentence directly states purpose, second adds context. No redundant information, well-structured.

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?

No output schema; description does not specify the response format. For a list endpoint, knowing what fields are returned could be helpful, but the description is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'fetch and filter' but does not elaborate on filtering semantics.

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 uses the verb 'retrieve' and specifies the resource 'contacts associated with a specific segment'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'reach_listContactsV1' (all contacts) and 'reach_listSegmentsV1' (segments) by requiring a segment UUID.

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 when you have a segment UUID and want its contacts, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for all contacts use reach_listContactsV1) or provide alternatives.

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