ringcentral_list_company_call_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'List' and discloses pagination limits (per_page max 1000), but omits other behavioral aspects such as how 'Simple' vs 'Detailed' affects payload size, timezone handling, or potential rate limits. The parameter details add some context but not comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 a compact docstring with the API path and a bulleted list of arguments. It is front-loaded with a clear purpose, and every additional line serves as parameter documentation. Slightly verbose but appropriate for a tool with 7 parameters.

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?

The description covers all parameters and the API endpoint, and an output schema exists so return values are defined elsewhere. However, it lacks usage context, such as typical date-range constraints, permission expectations, or differentiation from the sibling user_call_log tool, leaving the overall context incomplete.

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%, but the description manually documents all 7 parameters with concise explanations (e.g., 'ISO 8601 start of the date range', 'Results per page (max 1000)'). This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema property names and types.

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 begins with 'List account-wide call log records,' which clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'ringcentral_list_user_call_log' by emphasizing 'account-wide' versus per-user scope, and includes the API endpoint.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ringcentral_list_user_call_log, nor any mention of required permissions or account-wide implications. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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