get_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that pagination and filtering are supported, but lacks details on response format, read-only nature, default fields, or any potential side effects. The behavioral scope is minimal and uninformative.

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 a single, focused sentence in Russian, conveying the core action and high-level features without any filler words. It is highly concise and effectively front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining return values and usage context. It only states the basic list functionality with pagination and filters, leaving the agent without information about the response structure, default field behavior, or any limitations. This is insufficient for a tool with 4 parameters and non-trivial behavior.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a general mention of pagination and filters, which aligns with offset, pageSize, and filterId, but it adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's own documentation.

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 the specific verb 'Получить' (get) and resource 'список контактов' (list of contacts), clearly differentiating from the sibling get_contact by the explicit word 'list'. It also mentions pagination and filters, which further scopes the tool's functionality.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_contact or get_tasks. The description simply states what the tool does without any usage context or exclusions.

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