Contacts API: Get a contact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds a useful caveat that text and numeric identifiers may use Persian/Arabic-Indic digits, but it does not describe return format, error behavior, or authentication needs.

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 front-loaded with the operation and resource, then adds a relevant caveat. It contains no filler, though the raw endpoint is somewhat redundant with the schema.

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 two-parameter read tool, the description plus rich annotations and full schema coverage is largely sufficient to call it. It still lacks sibling differentiation and does not explain what contact details are returned, which would help an agent use the result.

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 100%, so both required parameters are fully documented there. The description mirrors the endpoint placeholders and adds a note about digit encoding, but provides no per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already supplies.

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 ('Get the details of a contact') and includes the API endpoint, making the basic operation clear. However, it does not differentiate this client contact fetch from similar siblings like gapify_get_contact or gapify_list_contacts.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative guidance. An agent must infer that this tool is for retrieving a known contact rather than listing or searching.

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