Programar cuelgue de una llamada

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so agent knows it's destructive. Description adds a warning but no further behavioral details (e.g., whether seconds=0 is immediate, if call must be active, or if cancellation is possible).

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 concise sentences front-load the action and warning. However, the brevity sacrifices important parameter details.

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 simple destructive tool with two params and no output schema, description covers the core action but omits parameter semantics, error handling, and scenario context. Fails to fully equip the agent given low schema coverage.

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%, and description offers no explanation of callId (format, required state) or seconds (range, behavior). Agent must infer parameter meaning from names alone, which is insufficient.

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 tool hangs up a call after N seconds ('Cuelga la llamada indicada dentro de N segundos') and emphasizes its destructive nature ('Cortará una llamada real'). This distinguishes it from pbx_hangup (immediate hangup) and other call control tools.

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 explicit guidelines on when to use vs alternatives, such as pbx_hangup for immediate hangs. The description implies scheduled hangup usage but lacks exclusion criteria (e.g., cannot be undone).

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