Get Calls

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries a lower burden. However, it merely restates filterable fields from the schema and adds no new behavioral details like pagination behavior, rate limits, or default result ordering.

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, each providing value: the first states the core purpose, the second adds context and filter hints. No redundant or extraneous content.

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?

Despite 10 optional parameters and no output schema, the description omits critical details like pagination (pageId, pageSize), default behavior when no filters are applied, and the return format. This inadequately prepares an agent for effective use.

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%, providing baseline of 3. The description groups parameters by category (date, email, qualification, call state) but does not add syntactic or relational meaning beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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 clearly states the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'call records', distinguishing it from sibling tools like hyros_get_leads or hyros_get_sales. The additional context about phone sales teams reinforces the tool's domain.

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?

The description provides a usage hint ('useful for businesses with phone sales teams') and lists filter options, but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or suggest alternative tools among the many siblings.

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