update_a_secondary_contact

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

The description restates the idempotentHint and readOnlyHint from annotations without adding new behavioral details. It does not disclose authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects beyond what annotations already provide.

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 somewhat repetitive ('Update a secondary contact' appears twice). It front-loads the HTTP method and resource, but the redundancy reduces conciseness. Could be trimmed to one sentence.

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 the tool's simplicity (update with two params, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It lacks explanation of the body fields' roles and the return value, but the schema compensates partially.

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 100%, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 'Update a secondary contact' and includes HTTP method and resource path. It distinguishes from siblings like create or delete secondary contacts, but doesn't elaborate on the concept of a secondary contact in the context of Contact Deals.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative update tools (e.g., update_a_contact_new, update_a_deal_new). The description only says it modifies an existing record, lacking context for decision-making.

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