google-contacts_get_contact

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist, or any authentication or rate limit considerations. The description carries the full burden and provides nothing.

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 short but fails to be front-loaded with valuable information. While concise in length, the single sentence does not earn its place as it adds little to no useful content beyond the tool name.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain how to identify a contact, the return format, or any required context, making it insufficient for proper tool selection and invocation.

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 has zero parameters, and the baseline score for 0 params is 4. The description does not add parameter-specific information, but since there are no parameters, no additional meaning is required.

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 'get_contact endpoint for google-contacts' is essentially a tautology, restating the tool name without adding meaningful context about what specific contact it retrieves or how it differs from sibling tools.

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 like google-contacts_list_contacts or google-contacts_search_contacts. The description offers no context on prerequisites or usage scenarios.

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