List assistant labels (paginated), each with its assistants_count. Labels are tags; an assistant can carry multiple labels across folders.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| per_page | No | 1-100, default 15 |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | ||
| data | No | ||
| from | No | ||
| total | No | ||
| per_page | No | ||
| last_page | No | ||
| current_page | No | ||
| next_page_url | No | ||
| prev_page_url | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, making the safety profile clear. The description adds context about pagination and the assistants_count field, enriching understanding without contradicting 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 is extremely concise, using two sentences to convey purpose, pagination, and the relationship between labels and assistants. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded.
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 the presence of annotations and an output schema (mentioned but not shown), the description provides sufficient context. It explains the return value (labels with assistants_count) and the data model, making it complete for a list operation.
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 50%; one parameter (per_page) has a schema description, but page lacks one. The tool description mentions pagination but does not elaborate on page or per_page beyond the schema. It adds minimal semantic value for parameters.
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 lists assistant labels with their assistants_count, explaining that labels are tags and an assistant can have multiple labels across folders. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_label, delete_label, and update_label.
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 mentions 'paginated' and the purpose is unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The context is clear enough for a simple listing operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct resources and actions clearly (e.g., create_assistant vs create_campaign). However, there is some overlap like get_outbound_assistants vs get_assistants and list_all_phone_numbers vs get_phone_numbers, causing minor ambiguity.
Tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., create_document, delete_label, get_voices). Only minor deviations exist, such as generate_ai_reply and list_all_phone_numbers, but overall the pattern is maintained.
With 75 tools, the server is excessively large. Although the domain is broad (assistants, calls, messaging, etc.), the number of tools makes it difficult for agents to navigate and select the correct one, reducing coherence.
The tool set covers CRUD operations for most resources, plus webhooks, AI replies, and reference data fetching. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no delete_conversation, no attach phone number to assistant), but the surface is largely comprehensive for the platform's purpose.
