m365_search_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool searches contacts but does not disclose key behaviors: whether a query is required, how results are returned, or any side effects. The mismatch between description and schema further reduces transparency.

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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it is misleading due to the parameter mismatch, and the structure is minimal but not well-formed for agent understanding.

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?

Given the lack of parameters and output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to provide search input or what the output looks like, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. However, the description adds misleading information by mentioning search criteria that are not present in the schema. It does not meaningfully clarify parameters beyond the schema, and the inconsistency is detrimental.

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 action (search contacts) and the target (Microsoft 365 address book), and mentions search criteria (name, email, company). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'search_contacts' or 'list_contacts', which may have similar purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. More critically, it mentions search criteria that are not captured in the input schema (which has no parameters), creating a mismatch that misleads the agent about how to invoke the tool.

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