list_contacts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'List' signals a read-only operation and the mention of filters adds behavior, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior, default result size, or authentication requirements. The behavior is minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single sentence conveys the verb, resource, source system, and optional filters with zero fluff. The description is front-loaded and 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 simple, read-only list tool with a fully documented schema, the description is nearly complete. The only gaps are lack of explicit notes on pagination or return structure, which are minor because the schema defines 'start' and the tool name itself implies the return value.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes the filter parameters (name, phone, email) but adds no meaning beyond the schema; start and select are left to the schema, which fully documents them.

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 opens with the specific verb 'List' and names the resource 'CRM contacts from Bitrix24', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_deals and create_contact. It also mentions the optional filters, making the tool's scope immediately obvious.

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 conveys a clear functional context—retrieve contacts, optionally filtered by name/phone/email—but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as create_contact or list_deals. The usage is implied by the resource and verb rather than spelled out.

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