Create Contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the permission requirement and the user scope, which is useful. However, it omits behavior like return value, default folder, or error conditions, leaving some important aspects unspecified.

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: two sentences. The first sentence states the action and permission, and the second provides Chinese intent synonyms. Every part serves a purpose, with no fluff.

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 create operation with all optional parameters, the description covers the core purpose, scope, and permission. It leaves out details like the destination folder and return value, but these are partially inferable from the sibling tool list and the schema.

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?

The input schema has 100% property description coverage, so all 8 parameters are already documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it creates a mailbox contact for the signed-in user, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like contacts_create_folder and contacts_update, and the Chinese intent mapping reinforces the purpose across languages.

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 provides context by specifying the target (signed-in user) and the required permission (delegated Contacts.ReadWrite), helping an agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternative tools, so it stops 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.