list_contacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' signals a read-only operation and the mesh scoping is disclosed, but nothing is said about result limits, pagination, or ordering. It adds some behavioral context but leaves notable gaps.

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 front-loaded sentence that covers action, scope, and the filter. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a simple single-parameter list tool the description is nearly sufficient, losing only a note on result volume or ordering.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0% and one undocumented parameter, the description compensates by explaining that 'query' is a search term matched against name, email, and company — meaning the schema alone would not supply.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List CRM contacts') and adds the scoping constraint 'in the active mesh'. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling create_contact or list_leads, but the read operation is unambiguous.

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 word 'optionally filtered' implies two usage modes (list-all vs search), which is implied guidance, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over list_leads or how search relates to those siblings.

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