Manage Contact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'consolidated tool' context, which is useful but does not disclose other behavioral traits like merge/replace/remove update modes or the requirement of contact_id for update/delete. These are left to the schema descriptions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action verb, and every word earns its place. 'Create, update, or delete a contact' is concise and complete, followed by the consolidation note that explains why this tool exists.

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 26-parameter CRUD tool with a rich schema and output schema, the description gives enough orientation (verb + consolidation) while the schema handles parameter-level details. It could briefly mention that batch operations are handled elsewhere, but the existing text is adequate given the schema size.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents every parameter with detailed descriptions, including deprecated aliases, mode behavior, and formatting. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond 'contact', so the baseline of 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 + resource: 'Create, update, or delete a contact.' It clearly distinguishes this from the 100+ sibling tools by stating it consolidates three former contact tools (create_contact, update_contact, delete_contact). This is a clear, unambiguous statement of purpose.

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?

It explicitly says this tool replaces create_contact, update_contact, and delete_contact, which tells the agent when to use it for those operations. However, it does not mention when NOT to use it (e.g., batch operations via manage_contacts_batch), leaving a small gap in exclusion guidance.

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