calls_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits: it doesn't indicate if this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, whether it's paginated, rate-limited, or what the output format looks like. For a search tool with complex parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 complexity (5 parameters with nested objects, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain the tool's behavior, parameter usage, output, or differentiation from siblings, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use it correctly.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain any of the 5 parameters (filterGroups, properties, limit, after, sorts) or their semantics. It fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 'Search calls with specific filters' states the basic action (search) and resource (calls), but is vague about scope and lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'calls_list' or 'calls_get'. It doesn't specify what kind of search this is (e.g., full-text, filtered, advanced) or how it differs from other call-related tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'calls_list' or 'calls_get'. The description mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain what scenarios warrant this tool over simpler listing tools, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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