Ver mensaje de voz

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a read-only operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations offer, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentence, which is concise but too brief. It could be expanded to include parameter context or usage hints without redundancy.

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 the simplicity of the tool and the presence of annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what details are returned, nor does it mention that IDs are required. The openWorldHint suggests variable response, but no further context is provided.

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 does not explain the meaning of extensionId or voicemailId. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent without clarity on parameter purpose.

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 'Detalle de un mensaje de voz concreto' clearly indicates the tool retrieves details of a specific voicemail. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pbx_list_voicemails (list), pbx_download_voicemail_audio (download audio), and pbx_mark_voicemail_read/unread (mark).

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., using pbx_list_voicemails to obtain IDs) or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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