list_contact_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action is listing, implying read-only, but omits details like pagination behavior, error handling for nonexistent contacts, or response format. This is insufficient for a tool with pagination parameters.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and to the point, with no redundant words. Perfectly concise.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at the return format or structure, but it does not. Pagination is implied by parameters but not explained. The description lacks completeness for a tool with three parameters and no return documentation.

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 clear parameter descriptions (e.g., 'identifier' can be ID, email, or phone). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('messaging channels connected to a contact'), with concrete examples (e.g., WhatsApp, Facebook). It differentiates from siblings like 'list_channels' (which likely lists all channels) by specifying per-contact scope.

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 use when needing channels for a specific contact, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'list_channels' or 'send_message'. No when-not or prerequisites are mentioned.

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