Contact detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Returns' implies a safe read and the description usefully scopes what data comes back plus an optional expansion, but it omits error behavior (invalid/missing contact_id), permission requirements, and whether the matters list is paginated.

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 front-loaded sentence that delivers the return scope first, with the optional expansion flagged at the end via 'optionally also'. No wasted words, though the semicolon clause could be split for scanability.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description does a fair job enumerating returned fields, which is the key missing structured data. However, it leaves out not-found/error behavior and whether pagination applies to the optional matters list—gaps an agent may hit at call time.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain include_matters ('optionally also the list of the contact's matters') and implies contact_id selects the contact, but gives no format or id-typing detail for contact_id beyond the schema's integer type.

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 and resource ('Returns contact detail') and enumerates the contents (e-mail addresses, phone numbers, addresses, custom fields). It distinguishes itself from contact_search/create/update via the 'get by id' semantics, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. The only hint is 'optionally also the list of the contact's matters', which implies when to set include_matters but never says so directly or points to clio_contact_search for discovery.

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