get_contact

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Get,' which implies a read operation. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permissions required, rate limits, or whether the operation is safe or destructive. The burden falls entirely on the description, which is insufficient.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose in the first sentence. Every word contributes meaning, with 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?

For a simple get tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately specifies the input. However, it lacks any information about the return format or what 'detailed information' means, leaving gaps given the absence of an output schema. It is minimally complete.

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 only defines 'target' as a required string with no description. The tool description adds significant value by clarifying that it accepts a phone number (with example) or a contact ID, giving concrete format guidance beyond the schema.

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 states 'Get detailed information about a specific contact,' using a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_contacts (plural) and search_contacts by implying a unique identifier. However, it does not elaborate on what constitutes 'detailed information,' which is vague.

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 such as search_contacts or list_contacts. The agent must rely solely on the tool name to infer appropriate usage context.

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