infoset_get_contact

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 this is a read operation (get), which implies non-destructive behavior, but it doesn't mention potential 404 responses, authentication requirements, or the scope of data returned. For a simple getter, the basic 'get' is sufficient context but lacks depth.

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?

Exactly one concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No redundant words, every word 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 1-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate. It tells the agent what resource is being retrieved and the key. It doesn't cover return value details or error cases, but the simplicity of the tool makes it complete enough.

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% — the contactId parameter is documented as 'Contact ID'. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, just repeats the notion of an ID. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'contact information' keyed by 'contact ID'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like infoset_list_contacts and infoset_batch_get_contacts, which serve different purposes.

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 that this tool is for fetching a single contact by ID, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like infoset_list_contacts or infoset_batch_get_contacts. There are no exclusion criteria or context cues.

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