t2000_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation with no side effects. The description does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the behavior is clear for a simple listing tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (mappings), how to use the output (with t2000_send), and how to add contacts (t2000_contact_add). It is comprehensive for a simple list tool.

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 no parameters (0 params, 100% coverage). Per the rule, baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details but explains the mapping and relationship to other tools.

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 'List saved contacts (name → address mappings).' It uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'contacts', distinguishing it from sibling tools like t2000_contact_add (saving) and t2000_contact_remove (removing).

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 guidance on when to use this tool: for listing contacts. It explicitly mentions using contact names with t2000_send instead of raw addresses and using t2000_contact_add to save new contacts. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the positive guidance is clear.

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