xero_contacts_get

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

The description indicates a read operation (get details) but doesn't mention side effects, permissions, or error handling. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden for transparency. It adequately describes the main behavior but lacks depth.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resulting data. Every word adds value 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?

The description includes the return fields (addresses, phone numbers, email) which is helpful given no output schema. It is complete for a simple get operation, but could mention potential error responses or pagination if applicable. Still, it meets the needs for this single-param tool.

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 schema covers the parameter fully with a description of the unique contact ID. The description adds no new semantics for the parameter; it only repeats 'by its ID'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% 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 clearly states it gets contact details by ID and lists specific return fields like addresses, phone numbers, and email. Distinguishes from siblings such as xero_contacts_list (list all) and xero_contacts_search (filtered) by focusing on a single contact retrieval.

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 use when you have a specific contact ID and need full details. It doesn't explicitly compare to siblings, but the purpose is clear enough from context. A brief mention of when not to use (e.g., for searches or creation) would improve it.

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