ghl_contact_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds value by noting pagination parameters (startAfterId, startAfter, limit) and OAuth scopes, but does not dive into edge cases or error states. The description does not contradict annotations.

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 repeats 'Get Contacts' twice and includes a verbose deprecation note with a URL, making it longer than necessary. The core information is present but would benefit from trimming redundant text.

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 no output schema, the description could describe the response structure (e.g., list of contact objects). However, the pagination details and deprecation context provide useful operational guidance. The tool is simple enough that this is adequate.

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% with each parameter having a description. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond listing pagination params and their role. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 is deprecated, returns a simple paginated list filtered by optional free-text query, and distinguishes itself from the advanced search sibling ghl_contact_search_advanced. It explicitly mentions the verb 'get' and the resource 'contacts'.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'prefer ghl_contact_search_advanced (POST /contacts/search) for new integrations' and 'Kept registered for legacy callers,' indicating when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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