Search contacts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the read-only nature. The description adds pagination behavior and that it returns matching contacts, which adds some value but does not detail edge cases (e.g., empty results, pagination cursor usage). It doesn't contradict 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?

Two concise sentences with the main purpose front-loaded. No redundant words, and it covers the essential scope and features efficiently.

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?

The description is adequate for a read-only search tool with 5 parameters, but it lacks details on the output structure (no output schema) and specific pagination mechanics (e.g., how to use startAfter/startAfterId). An agent can likely call it correctly, but some assumptions 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in the schema. The description mentions free-text query and pagination, aligning with the schema, but does not introduce new parameter details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool searches/lists contacts in a GoHighLevel location, specifies the free-text query matches name, email, and phone, and mentions pagination. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_get_contact (single contact) and ghl_create_contact.

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 usage for searching contacts but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that for fetching a specific contact by ID, ghl_get_contact should be used, nor does it discuss exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit routing.

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