create_contact

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly signals a mutating create operation and hints at the custom-fields mechanism. However, it does not disclose response format, required-field expectations, permissions, or potential side effects, which is a notable gap for an unannotated write operation.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the custom-fields tip is relevant enough to earn 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?

The description and schema together cover the core operation and all parameters. Missing context includes explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings (though implied), whether any field is effectively required despite schema marking none, and what the response looks like. Adequate for a simple create, but not fully complete.

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 all five parameters are already documented. The description's pointer to custom_fields_values for phone/email largely echoes the schema's own description ('Custom field values (phone, email, etc.)'), adding no new semantic content. 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 states the specific verb 'Create', the resource 'contact', and the platform 'amoCRM'. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create_lead and create_company. Mentioning custom_fields_values for phone, email, and other fields adds useful specificity.

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 makes the use case clear: creating a new contact in amoCRM. This implies when to use it over list/get tools and other create tools, though it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives. The practical hint about custom_fields_values provides light usage guidance.

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