wafeq_contacts_create

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

Annotations already indicate write/non-idempotent/non-destructive behavior, and the description adds valuable detail: calling twice creates two records, idempotency_key is sent as X-Wafeq-Idempotency-Key, and an auto-generated UUID protects retries. This goes beyond the structured annotations and does not contradict them.

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 header line is a compact summary, and the idempotency note is essential and well placed. There is minor redundancy between 'Create contact' and 'Endpoint for creating a new contact', but overall the description is tight and front-loaded.

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 create operation with a rich body schema, clear annotations, and a well-explained idempotency mechanism, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. It does not describe return values, but no output schema exists and the endpoint/fields are fully specified.

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 input schema fully documents the body fields and idempotency_key. The description reinforces idempotency_key usage but does not add significant semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'creating a new contact' and 'POST /contacts/'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wafeq_contacts_update, wafeq_contacts_list, and wafeq_contacts_destroy.

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 context is explicit: use this tool to create a new contact rather than to retrieve, update, list, or delete one. It does not name alternatives explicitly, but the create-vs-alternative context is unambiguous from the description.

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