Marcar buzón como no leído

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and destructiveness (destructiveHint=true). The description adds no behavioral details beyond the name. The destructive hint may be slightly misleading for a state-change operation, but no clear contradiction.

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?

Single sentence is concise but excessively minimal; lacks structure (e.g., no line breaks, no examples). Could be expanded slightly without losing brevity.

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?

For a mutation tool with destructive hint and no output schema, the description should at least mention side effects or return value. It provides no context beyond the basic action, leaving 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% with no parameter descriptions. The description does not explain what extensionId or voicemailId represent or how to obtain them, leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 clearly states the action (marks a voicemail as unlistened) matching the tool name. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'pbx_mark_voicemail_read', though the opposite intent is implied.

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 (e.g., after listening to a voicemail) or when to avoid it. No alternatives or conditions provided, relying solely on the tool name to convey context.

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