Export Contact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the tool is safe. The description adds context about error conditions (ValidationError, ValueError) and the format limitation (only 'vcard' supported), enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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 concise, structured with a summary line, Args, Returns, and Raises sections. It front-loads key information (emoji, read-only tag) and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

Given that the tool is read-only with comprehensive annotations and an output schema (not shown), the description covers input parameters, error behavior, and output intent. It is complete for its purpose.

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 0%, but the description includes an Args section that explains all three parameters: account_id, contact_id, and format (with supported value). This compensates for the missing schema descriptions and meets the baseline of 4 for low coverage.

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 'Export a contact in vCard format (read-only, safe for unsupervised use)', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like contact_get, contact_list, and contact_update by focusing on export.

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 usage for exporting contacts to vCard and mentions read-only safety, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are named.

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