List My Contacts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the required delegated Contacts.Read permission, which is useful, but it does not mention pagination, sorting, or potential errors. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly 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 compact: one English sentence with purpose and permission, followed by Chinese intent examples. It is front-loaded and every part adds value, with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description lacks explicit clarification about scope (e.g., whether it includes contacts from all folders) and does not differentiate it from contacts_list_folder_contacts. It is adequate but could be more complete given the sibling context.

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 schema already provides full description for the only parameter 'top' (range 1-100), so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given high schema coverage.

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: listing mailbox contacts for the signed-in user. It uses a specific verb ('List'), resource ('mailbox contacts'), and scope ('for the signed-in user'), distinguishing it from folder-specific or search tools.

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 usage when a user wants to see their own contacts, but it does not explicitly provide alternatives or exclusions (e.g., for folder-scoped contacts, use contacts_list_folder_contacts). The permission requirement and multilingual examples give some context, but no direct comparison to siblings.

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