Get Contact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the tool is clearly a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond listing expandable entities, which is more about optional parameters than system behavior.

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: one sentence for purpose, then a list of expand values, and three short usage tips. Every sentence adds value, and the critical info (purpose) is front-loaded. No redundancy or 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?

Given that this is a simple GET tool with rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, etc.) and no output schema, the description adequately covers how to invoke it correctly. The param hints (expand, select) are sufficient for an agent to fetch the exact data needed. No gaps remain.

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 fully describes all three parameters (id, expand, select) with individual descriptions. The description adds concrete examples and notes (e.g., 'Phone is NOT selectable — omit it from $select and use $expand=Phones instead'), which goes beyond the schema's baseline. This helps agents avoid common pitfalls.

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 'Get a single contact by ID from Ploomes CRM', which is a specific verb+resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like ploomes_contacts_list (which retrieves multiple contacts) and ploomes_contacts_create/update/delete.

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?

While it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool vs alternatives, it provides clear guidance on when to use specific $expand options (e.g., 'Use $expand=OtherProperties to include custom field values'). The context of sibling tool names implies usage for single-contact retrieval, but no explicit exclusion is given.

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