list_client_contacts

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

No annotations provided, but description includes endpoint and tier 'readonly-owner', indicating a read-only operation. This adds behavioral context beyond the schema, though no contradictions exist.

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?

Description is concise with two sentences plus endpoint and tier notation. No wasted words, but lacks structure like bullet points or sections.

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?

Lacks return value or output schema description. For a list tool, it covers purpose and parameters adequately but omits pagination details (cursor explained in schema) and response format, leaving some gaps.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'optionally filtered', so it meets the baseline but does not exceed 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?

Description clearly states 'List contact person for a client company records' with optional filtering. It distinguishes from sibling tool get_client_contact and maps to a specific endpoint, providing a clear purpose.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives mentioned. Context implies usage via 'optionally filtered' and comparison with get_client_contact for single records, but lacks direct guidance on selecting this tool over others.

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