list_contacts_for_account

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

The annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds that role matching is exact and gives sample roles, but it does not describe return shape, pagination, or permission requirements beyond what the annotations and output schema already cover.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a compact Args section. Every line adds usable information, and there is no redundant restatement of annotations or schema structure.

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 simple two-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is nearly complete. It covers both parameters with useful examples and does not need to explain return values because the output schema exists. The main missing piece is usage guidance versus sibling contact tools.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameters and mostly succeeds. It explains that account can be an ID or a name/substring and that role is an optional exact-match filter with concrete examples. It does not clarify the default empty-string behavior for role or case sensitivity.

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 gives a clear specific verb and resource: 'List contacts (people) who work at a given account.' It distinguishes the resource from sibling tools like get_contact or search_contacts by making the account scope explicit. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling alternatives it should be preferred over.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus search_contacts, get_contact, or list_accounts. The account-scoped list purpose is implied by the tool name and parameter text, but the description never states when this is the right choice or when another sibling is better.

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