extract_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns emails, social links (with examples), and phone numbers. It does not mention limitations like dynamic content or rate limits, but for a basic extraction tool, the transparency is adequate.

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 with three sentences: a clear purpose statement, two usage contexts, and a parameter explanation. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the single parameter and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (emails, social links, phone numbers) and how to use it. No additional context is needed for a straightforward extraction tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the parameter 'url' lacks schema-level documentation. The description compensates fully by specifying it must be a full URL and providing an example, adding critical meaning 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 it extracts email addresses, social media links, and phone numbers from any URL. The verb 'extract' and the specific resource 'contacts' make the purpose unambiguous, and the tool is clearly distinguishable from siblings like 'extract_entities' or 'parse_phone_number'.

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 explicitly provides use cases such as lead generation, finding contact information on company websites, and researching business contacts. It does not specify when not to use the tool or mention alternatives, but the given contexts are clear and sufficient for typical usage.

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