aircall_list_calls

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

Given readOnlyHint=true, annotations already signal a safe read. The description adds value by disclosing the return payload (direction, status, duration, associated contacts/users) and pagination behavior, going beyond the annotation's safety indication. It does not address rate limits or auth, but with a read-only hint those are less critical.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the verb and resource, then adds valuable specifics about optional filters and return contents. Every word contributes, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Combined with 100% schema parameter coverage and readOnlyHint, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's purpose, its optionality, and the response summary. It does not detail envelope structures like pagination metadata, but for a straightforward list tool this is not a significant gap.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, with every parameter having a description (including defaults and enums). The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'List calls with optional filters,' which is a specific verb+resource statement. It further distinguishes this tool from single-call or search siblings by mentioning 'paginated call history' and specific return fields, making it clear this is a collection-listing tool.

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 states that filters are optional and indicates the tool returns paginated call history, giving clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like aircall_search_calls, nor does it provide exclusions (e.g., when to use a different tool), so it lacks full when/when-not guidance.

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