Get Contact Import

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns status and counts and can track progress, which implies a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or mention authentication needs. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second provides usage context and expected progress states. No fluff, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and expected outputs (statuses). Could detail what 'counts' means (e.g., total, processed) but overall complete enough for the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 100% with the 'id' parameter described as 'Contact import ID'. The description adds minimal value beyond confirming the parameter is an import ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate beyond the schema.

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 tool gets the status and counts of a contact import by ID, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'create-contact-import' by noting it should be used after creation, and from 'list-contact-imports' by focusing on a single import.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after create-contact-import to track progress', providing clear context for when to invoke. It also lists the possible statuses (queued, in_progress, completed, failed) which helps the agent understand expected states. Missing explicit guidance on when not to use, but the context is sufficient.

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