Transferencia atendida — completar

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

The description discloses that the tool joins the two parties and exits, adding behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). It does not contradict annotations. It could mention prerequisites or failure states.

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?

One efficient sentence, no redundancy, front-loaded with key action. Every word earns its place.

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 no output schema and one parameter, the description minimally explains the outcome (joins and exits) but lacks details on return values, success/failure indications, or the need for prior initiation. Adequate but with gaps.

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% (description mentions no parameters). The single required parameter callId is self-explanatory by name, but the description adds no additional meaning, failing to compensate for low coverage.

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 it completes an attended transfer previously initiated, using specific verb 'Completa' and resource 'transferencia atendida'. It distinguishes from siblings like pbx_attended_transfer_start and pbx_attended_transfer_cancel.

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 implies it must be used after starting an attended transfer, but does not explicitly mention that pbx_attended_transfer_cancel exists for cancellation or provide when-not-to-use scenarios.

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