Get Contact Schema

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the exact structure of the return value (name, required, type, input_format, is_custom_field, notes), including that it returns ALL fields, and instructs the agent to call it before creating a contact. This provides actionable context beyond the tool name, without any contradictions.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence and a bulleted list of return fields. It is slightly verbose with the 'ALWAYS' instruction and detailed bullet list, but each element adds value and the main purpose is 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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is comprehensive. It explains what the tool does, what it returns in detail, and when to use it, providing an agent with all necessary information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty and the description cannot add parameter-level semantics. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, which is appropriate here since the description focuses on the output fields rather than input semantics, which is exactly what is needed.

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 explicitly states 'Get complete field schema for creating/editing contacts' with a specific verb and resource. It also lists the returned fields, making the purpose unmistakable and distinguishing it from sibling schema tools like get_company_schema or get_pipeline_item_schema.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'ALWAYS call this before creating a contact to understand what data is needed.' It also clarifies that the tool returns both system and custom fields, implicitly differentiating it from get_custom_fields and positioning it as the comprehensive schema retrieval for contacts.

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