retrieve_contact_field_values

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds the HTTP path and repeats 'Fetches data. Makes no changes', which aligns with annotations but does not provide additional behavioral context beyond structured data.

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 and front-loaded with a read-only indicator and HTTP path. However, there is minor redundancy: the title line is repeated in the description. Overall, it is efficient but not perfectly lean.

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?

The description does not mention return values or pagination behavior, though parameters imply pagination. Given no output schema, more context on what the response contains would improve completeness. Still adequate for a simple retrieval 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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so the schema already documents parameter semantics adequately. The description does not add any extra parameter information beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a contact's field values, specifying the resource and verb. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like 'retrieve_a_custom_field_value' or 'list_all_custom_field_values', which could lead to confusion.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It only states it is read-only, which is already indicated by annotations. No context on when not to use or preferred scenarios.

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