Search Contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does not mention that results can be limited via the limit parameter, that emails and phones are included only if requested, or the meaning of revealValues. The tool's read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 concise sentence, but it omits critical parameter details. It is front-loaded with the primary action but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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?

With five parameters, no schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is too brief to fully inform an agent. It fails to explain key parameters or expected output, making it incomplete for effective tool usage.

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 0%, yet the description only explains the query parameter implicitly by listing searchable fields. The other four parameters (limit, includeEmails, includePhones, revealValues) are completely unexplained, leaving the agent to guess their purpose.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb 'Search' and resource 'Apple Contacts', and lists searchable fields (name, organization, job title, email, phone). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_contact or delete_contact.

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 when to use the tool (to search contacts) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Given the sibling tools are clearly different actions, the usage context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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