send_contact

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), the description discloses no additional behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, requirements, or response characteristics, so the agent gains little extra insight.

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 extremely concise with one short sentence, which is good for readability, but it under-specifies the tool. It earns a moderate score because conciseness is positive, yet the content is insufficient for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool has 13 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the one-sentence description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain required inputs, optional behaviors, or any preconditions, making it nearly impossible for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional inference.

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 only 23% (three of thirteen parameters have descriptions), and the description provides no parameter details. It does not compensate for the low coverage, leaving semantics of phone_number, first_name, etc. to be inferred from names alone.

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 'Send a phone contact' clearly uses a specific verb and resource, indicating it sends a contact card. It distinguishes from sibling send tools by naming the resource type, though it does not elaborate on the context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as send_message or other send methods. The description lacks any contextual direction or exclusions.

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