list_sent_contact_requests

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states it returns a JSON string but omits key traits like read-only nature, pagination defaults, sorting order, or whether status filter is case-sensitive. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 short and well-structured with bulleted parameter explanations and a returns line. Every sentence is necessary, and there is no extraneous information.

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 list tool with pagination and filter, the description covers basic usage but lacks details on pagination behavior, filter interactions, and any limitations. The existence of an output schema helps, but the description alone is only minimally 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 coverage is 0%, so the description is the sole source. It explains status with listed values and describes page/page_size briefly. However, it does not specify default behaviors (e.g., null page returns all), leaving gaps that the schema alone cannot fill.

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 clearly states 'List contact requests sent by the user.' It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes well from siblings like list_received_contact_requests and list_agent_contact_requests, indicating sent vs. received or agent-specific scope.

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 the tool is for sent requests but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like list_received_contact_requests. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites is provided, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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