outlook_get_contact

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

The annotations include readOnlyHint=true, indicating a read operation. The description's 'Get' aligns with this. It adds the detail 'full contact', implying the returned data is comprehensive, which is useful beyond the annotation.

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 with five words, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word 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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and annotations present, the description is nearly complete. It lacks details on the return structure, but given no output schema, it is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 0%. The description mentions 'by ID' but does not explain the format or source of contact_id. For a single required parameter with no schema description, more context would be beneficial.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'contact', and the scope 'one full contact by ID'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like outlook_list_contacts (list) and outlook_search_contacts (search).

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 does not explicitly provide when to use or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. The context is implied from the purpose, but there is no explicit guidance or mention of related tools.

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