list-customer-contacts

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds the HTTP method (GET) and required authorization scope (customers:read), giving the agent concrete expectations about side effects and permissions. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 sentence contains the action, resource path, and scope with no filler or repetition. Every element earns its place.

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 read-only list operation, the combination of description, full parameter schema, and readOnlyHint covers what an agent needs to select and invoke the tool. Pagination is expressed through page/itemsPerPage in the schema, and no output schema is expected for this simple list call.

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 already documents all four parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds the endpoint template, clarifying that customerId is a path parameter, but does not need to repeat parameter details. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 identifies the exact action (List contacts), the resource scope (for a customer), and the endpoint path. It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like list-customers and get-contact by specifying the customer-scoped contact collection.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to retrieve the contacts belonging to a specific customer, as reflected by the customerId path parameter. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for single-contact retrieval or creation, but no exclusions are needed because the purpose is unambiguous.

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