retrieve_a_contacts_geo_ip_address

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'Fetches data. Makes no changes' which is consistent but adds minimal value beyond annotations. No additional behavioral traits like rate limits or auth requirements are disclosed. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise, using three short lines. The first line includes a read-only indicator and HTTP method, which is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: purpose, read-only nature, and HTTP path. No extraneous text.

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 there is no output schema, the description does not hint at the return structure or fields. The tool has complex parameters (orders, filters) but the description ignores them. For a simple retrieval, the context is adequate but could be improved by mentioning the response format.

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 coverage is 100%, so description carries no burden to explain parameters. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema property descriptions already provide, such as details on pagination or filtering. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves a contact's geo IP address using a specific HTTP GET endpoint. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'contacts geo IP address' are explicit. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'retrieve_contact_geo_ips' (plural), which likely lists all geo IPs, while this one retrieves a single one by ID.

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 includes 'Fetches data. Makes no changes' which implies this is a read-only operation. However, it does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'retrieve_contact_geo_ips' or other retrieval tools. No explicit context for selection.

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