Retrieve a list of all agents with their phone numbers and voice configuration. Use this to select an agent before making calls.
List all agents with their phone numbers and voice configuration. An agent is required before you can make calls — it owns phone numbers and handles voice/SMS.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results to return |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds domain context that agents own phone numbers and handle voice/SMS, but says nothing about pagination or result ordering despite the limit parameter.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and returned data, with the domain note following. No wasted words, though the second sentence drifts slightly into general platform 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?
For a read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned and why it matters. Minor gaps around pagination and ordering remain, but nothing critical is missing.
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 100% and there is a single optional parameter fully documented in the schema ('Max results to return'). The description adds no parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List all agents') and even names the returned fields (phone numbers, voice configuration), which is more than the bare name. It distinguishes itself reasonably from get_agent by scope ('all'), but never explicitly contrasts with the sibling list/get tools, so it falls short of a 5.
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 useful context ('an agent is required before you can make calls') that implies why you'd list agents, but gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing versus get_agent, create_agent, or list_numbers. Usage is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.