Create Contact Task

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

Annotations provide the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as side effects, permission requirements, or idempotency concerns. The description is essentially a tautology of the name, offering no information beyond the annotations already convey.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and easy to parse. However, it is under-specified for a tool with 6 parameters, so while efficient, it lacks necessary detail.

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?

With no output schema and minimal description, the tool lacks critical context such as return value, side effects, or when to use it. The description only covers the basic purpose, leaving the agent without enough information to invoke it confidently in a real workflow.

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 83% (5 of 6 properties have descriptions), which exceeds the 80% threshold, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level information; it relies entirely on the schema for meaning.

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 'Create a task for a contact' uses a specific verb (create) and resource (task) with the target (contact), making the primary function clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_update_contact_task because 'create' implies a new task, but it does not explicitly reference alternatives.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus updating or listing tasks, nor are prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description only states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and title.

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