Create contact

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the key trait: this is a write operation requiring a preview-then-confirm handshake using a returned token. It doesn't cover permission requirements or what the create returns, but the confirmation mechanism is meaningful behavioral context.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the create action and immediately followed by the write-flow constraint. The parenthetical field lists are dense but every element maps to a real parameter.

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 14-parameter tool with nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it doesn't clarify the required-field rules beyond the type enum, explain custom_field_values, or indicate the return shape. A bit more coverage would be needed for a 4-5.

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 low (36%), so the description must compensate, and it does for the core params: it explains the person (first_name + last_name) vs company (name) distinction and names email, phone, address, sales_tax_number, and company link. It still omits title, prefix, date_of_birth, and custom_field_values, leaving some parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (creates) plus the resource and its two subtypes (person vs company), and spells out the field set involved. An agent can distinguish this from contact_update/contact_get/contact_search by verb alone.

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?

Gives clear context for the two-step write flow ('preview first, then confirm with the token from the preview'), which tells the agent how to sequence calls. It does not name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to prefer contact_update), so it falls short of a 5.

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