set_agent_contact

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

Discloses that new or changed emails trigger operator email reply verification, a side effect. Also mentions cost context. However, no details on permissions, overwrite behavior, or other consequences beyond the stated effect.

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, no redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose, then side effect and cost. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose, side effects, and cost. Lacks details on return values, error handling, idempotency, or prerequisites. Missing output schema and annotations, so more burden on description.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds minimal value beyond schema: it aggregates the parameters but does not clarify format or constraints not already in schema. The verification trigger is already in the schema's email description.

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 the tool registers agent contact info (name, email, webhook). It implies creation/update but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_agent_contact_status or verify_agent_contact_email.

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 guidance on when to use this tool or when to use alternatives. 'Free with allowance auth' hints at cost context but does not specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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