list_voice_menus

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It explains paging behavior (walks as many pages as needed due to CTM's per_page cap), truncation warning when max_items is exceeded, and the default of active sub-accounts only. This is rich behavioral context beyond what the schema shows.

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 well-structured and front-loaded. The first sentence gives the core purpose, and the subsequent sentences add necessary detail on pagination, limits, and status filtering. Every sentence provides value, with no filler or repetition of the schema.

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 covers all essential behaviors for a list tool: paging, limits, status filtering, and truncation warnings. Combined with the presence of an output schema, it is largely complete. The main gap is the lack of explicit detail on the account_ids parameter format, but this is a minor omission given the overall clarity.

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 compensate. It does well for status (lists valid values and default) and max_items (explains its purpose and when to increase it). It also clarifies per_page in the context of paging. However, account_ids is not explicitly explained beyond the phrase 'across sub-accounts', leaving its format or filtering behavior ambiguous.

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 exact function: 'List IVR voice menus across sub-accounts.' This uses a specific verb (list), a specific resource (IVR voice menus), and a scope (across sub-accounts), which distinguishes it from siblings like list_voice_bots or get_voice_menu.

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 gives explicit operational guidance, such as raising max_items for accounts with many menus and passing status values to include archived/canceled/paused menus. It implies when to use this tool (listing across sub-accounts) but does not explicitly call out alternatives like get_voice_menu for a single menu, so it misses a clear exclusion.

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