calls_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'List all calls' but doesn't mention pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' and 'after' parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether it's a read-only operation. The description is insufficient for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise at just 6 words, front-loading the core purpose. There's zero wasted language, making it easy to parse quickly, though this conciseness comes at the expense of completeness.

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 tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how filtering works, or behavioral characteristics. The agent would struggle to use this tool effectively based solely on the description.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. 'optional filtering' is mentioned but doesn't map to specific parameters like 'limit', 'after', 'properties', 'associations', or 'archived'. The description fails to provide any meaningful parameter context beyond what's in the bare schema.

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 'List all calls with optional filtering' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('calls'), but it's vague about what 'optional filtering' entails. It doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'calls_search' or 'calls_get', leaving ambiguity about when to use each.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'calls_search' or 'calls_get'. The description mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't specify what types of filtering are available or how it differs from search functionality, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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