Bulk create Google Contacts in one request by providing an array of contact objects with name, email, phone, organization, and title fields.
Create multiple contacts at once. Each dict: {givenName, familyName, email, phone, organization, title}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| contacts | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior, yet it only restates the action "create" which is already evident from the name. It fails to mention side effects, error handling, atomicity, batch limits, or required permissions, providing no meaningful behavioral transparency.
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 one sentence that front-loads the action and immediately provides a compact inline schema for the input. It is free of unnecessary words and every element contributes useful information.
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 relatively simple and the input structure is described, but operational context is missing, such as batch size limits, behavior on partial failures, and whether the operation is atomic. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be detailed, but other behavioral gaps remain, leaving the description minimally adequate.
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 provides no descriptions for the contacts array items (0% coverage), so the description adds value by listing expected fields: "{givenName, familyName, email, phone, organization, title}". However, it does not specify data types, required vs. optional status, or formats, offering only partial compensation for the schema gap.
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's function: "Create multiple contacts at once." It specifies the verb (Create), resource (contacts), and scope (multiple), effectively distinguishing it from the sibling tool contacts_create for single contact creation. The preview of the contact dict structure adds further clarity.
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 batch usage with the phrase "multiple contacts at once," but it does not explicitly contrast with contacts_create or state when not to use this tool. No alternatives are mentioned, so usage guidance relies on inference rather than explicit direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.