Retrieve additional account contacts for a Hostkey account. Use it to fetch billing or administrative contact details for account management.
List of additional account contacts (whmcs/get_contacts).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the internal endpoint path (whmcs/get_contacts), with nothing about return contents, pagination, or whether the list is scoped to the authenticated account.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no padding. The parenthetical API path is arguably noise for an agent, but it costs little and the whole description is one line.
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 zero-parameter, annotated read tool this is close to sufficient, but with no output schema the description could have named the contact fields returned (name, email, etc.) or clarified scope. Adequate but leaves a real gap.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the schema is trivially complete.
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 names a specific resource (account contacts) and implies the list/read verb, which cleanly separates it from the write siblings add_contact, update_contact, and delete_contact. The qualifier 'additional' hints these are secondary contacts rather than the primary billing client, though it is not spelled out.
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?
There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_billing_client or the contact mutation tools. No prerequisites, auth requirements, or filtering context are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.