Get Contact

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

Annotations fully cover safety (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint). The description adds no further behavioral traits (e.g., authentication needs, rate limits). With annotations present, this is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise—five words—with no unnecessary information. It is front-loaded and immediately clear.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter, the description is complete. Annotations cover behavioral aspects, and no output schema is needed for a straightforward retrieval. No gaps remain.

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 the 'id' parameter already described as 'Contact ID'. The description's 'by ID' adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a single contact by ID' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('contact'), clearly indicating the tool retrieves one contact. It distinguishes itself from siblings like lexware_list_contacts (lists multiple) and lexware_create_contact (creates).

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 contact ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like lexware_list_contacts (to find an ID) or when not to use it. No context on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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