List Outreach Contacts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses only one trait: results are the "latest" rows (an implicit recency ordering). It says nothing about read-only safety, pagination or truncation behavior, what happens above the default limit of 50, or whether contact PII is exposed.

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?

It is short with zero waste, but the brevity is under-specification rather than economy: a single sentence fragment that omits the verb and the resource. Front-loading is moot when there is only one clause.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but for a list tool with a limit parameter, no annotations, and a send/contact-management sibling set, the definition should at minimum say it is a read operation, its ordering, and its scope. None of that is present.

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 single parameter `limit` has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description, so its meaning (max rows returned? default 50, max cap?) is undocumented everywhere. The word "latest" hints at a window but not how it interacts with limit.

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?

"Latest rows of the outreach log" is a noun fragment that restates the title (List Outreach Contacts) without a verb or the object actually being listed (contacts). It implies recency ordering, but an agent learns nothing about what a "row" contains or whether contacts are being read or written.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all, and no comparison to the available siblings (preview_message, send_email, save_outreach_contact, add_do_not_contact). The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the read-side listing tool in an otherwise write/send-heavy toolset.

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