ghl_contact_get_duplicate

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

Discloses endpoint, OAuth scopes, URL encoding, and the duplicate-checking business logic. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive; description adds useful context without contradiction.

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 moderately concise but includes redundancy (title repeated) and technical endpoint details that could be trimmed. The key information is present, but structure could be tighter.

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?

Lacks description of the response format or error conditions, which would be helpful given no output schema. The business logic and parameter constraints are well covered, but the agent is left without info on what the tool returns.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical business logic (at least one parameter required) and URL encoding details, which are not in the schema. This enhances understanding 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 clearly states the tool finds duplicate contacts using email or phone, with business logic based on the 'Allow Duplicate Contact' setting. This distinguishes it from other contact tools like ghl_contact_get_by_id or ghl_contact_search_advanced, though explicit differentiation is absent.

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?

Provides explicit guidance that at least one of `number` or `email` must be supplied, explains the priority of search fields based on settings, and mentions URL encoding requirements. It does not explicitly say when to avoid this tool, but the purpose implies it's only for duplicate detection.

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