list_voice_bots

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does so well: it discloses automatic pagination, the per_page ceiling (~100), the truncation-warning behavior, and the default status filter. This gives the agent concrete expectations for side effects and limits.

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?

Three short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, then defaults/status. No redundant phrases; every sentence adds information.

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?

The description is strong for a list tool: it covers pagination, limits, warnings, and statuses, and an output schema exists to define return shape. The main omission is account_ids semantics, which makes it not fully complete for the 4-parameter schema.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It meaningfully explains status values, max_items truncation, and per_page cap, but it never explains the account_ids parameter (format, filtering behavior, relationship to 'across sub-accounts'), leaving a gap for correct invocation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List VoiceAI voice bots across sub-accounts'), making the tool's scope immediately clear. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_voice_bot (single bot retrieval) and list_voice_menus (different resource).

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?

It explicitly notes the default active-sub-account scope and lists valid status override values ('archived', 'canceled', 'paused', 'all'), and frames when to raise max_items. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like get_voice_bot for singleton lookups, so it stops short of a full when/when-not guide.

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