Click-to-call inverso de cola

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the note '⚠️ Real call,' indicating that the tool makes an actual phone call. This is minimal additional context, but sufficient given the annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise (one sentence plus emoji). While it is front-loaded with the key concept, it sacrifices clarity and completeness. Every sentence is short, but collectively insufficient.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is highly incomplete. It omits any information about return values, side effects, prerequisites, or usage examples, leaving gaps for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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%, and the description only loosely references 'to' and 'queue name' without explaining any parameter meaning, format, or constraints. No value added over the bare schema.

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?

Description is vague: 'inverse variant: dials 'to' in the name of the queue.' It does not clearly state that the tool initiates a call, nor does it distinguish from sibling tools like pbx_click_to_call_queue. The warning about 'real call' adds some context but purpose remains unclear.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling tools include pbx_click_to_call_queue and pbx_click_to_call_external, but the description provides no differentiation or context for selection.

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