search_contacts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses no behavior beyond the obvious – no mention of partial vs. exact matching, which fields are searched, how results are ordered, rate limits, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a search operation.

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 a single sentence that is easy to parse and front-loaded. It contains no fluff or unnecessary details, making it very concise. It sacrifices substance for brevity, but that is more appropriately penalized in other dimensions.

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 search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain the return format, whether results are paginated, or the underlying search behavior. Given the many sibling contact tools, this lack of context makes the description incomplete.

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 has one 'query' parameter with 0% description coverage, and the description does not compensate. It fails to explain what the query should contain (e.g., name, email, phone) or how matching works, adding no value beyond the parameter name already present in the schema.

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?

Description states 'Search for contacts in Freshdesk' – a clear verb (search) and resource (contacts), which distinguishes it from siblings like list_contacts and get_contact by implying query-based lookup. However, it lacks detail on search scope or matching criteria, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like list_contacts and get_contact exist, but the description doesn't explain when search_contacts is preferable, nor does it mention any limits, prerequisites, or alternative scenarios.

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