Search contacts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; the description redundantly says 'Read-only' but adds that it searches multiple contact types and lists filter fields. No further behavioral traits like pagination or result limits are disclosed.

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?

Extremely concise; one sentence plus 'Read-only' immediately conveys the operation. No wasted words, though it misses some useful context.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the response format, pagination behavior, or how filters interact, leaving significant ambiguity for a search 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?

Schema description coverage is low (20%); only skip and take have descriptions. The description mentions filtering by name, FFL number, trade name, or organization name, which maps to some properties, but does not clarify individual fields such as suffix, middleName, licenseName, or how filters combine.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Search' and the resource 'contacts' (individuals, organizations, FFLs). Distinguishes from siblings like get_contact or create_contact by focusing on search/filter behavior.

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 finding contacts via filters but does not explicitly state when to use it over get_contact or other tools, nor does it provide exclusions. Sibling tools suggest a direct lookup via get_contact, but that is not mentioned.

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