Grabaciones de un periodo

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds that it does not download itself, which is consistent. However, it does not address the openWorldHint implications (e.g., incomplete results) or other behavioral traits like pagination.

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?

Two sentences that are efficient and front-loaded: first states the core functionality, second adds key constraint (no download) and use case. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (metadata and MP3 URL) and its read-only nature. It omits details about response structure (e.g., array) and does not mention openWorldHint implications, but is largely sufficient for a listing 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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. Description does not add significant detail beyond the schema; it only implies that 'date' is for a single day while range parameters are for intervals. No additional semantics for parameter format or constraints.

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 it lists calls with recordings for a day/range, including metadata and download URL. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pbx_download_recording by noting it does not download anything, and from pbx_calls_in_range by specifying recording=true.

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?

Description implies usage as a starting point for downloading and transcribing, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use. It provides clear context but lacks direct exclusion criteria.

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