Get Contact

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, noting that either an ID or email can be used. It does not disclose details like what happens if both are provided, error behavior, or return format, but with annotations already signaling a safe read operation, this is acceptable for a simple getter.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no extraneous words. It is concise and appropriately structured for a simple get operation.

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 tool is simple, and the description covers the essential purpose and context (from Resend). However, it does not specify that at least one of id or email is required, nor the precedence if both are supplied, which is a minor gap given the optional parameters in the schema.

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 schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (ID and email), and the description merely restates 'by ID or email' without adding new semantic detail. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and no additional meaning is contributed.

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 'Get' and the resource 'a contact', specifying that lookup is by ID or email. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-contacts, create-contact, and update-contact, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 implies the primary use case: retrieving a single contact when you have an ID or email. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is clear enough that an agent can infer when to use this tool over list-contacts or other contact operations.

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