Genesys Cloud MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool returns paginated results and that outputs can be used for further analysis, which is helpful context. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether this is a read-only operation, leaving behavioral gaps.

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 single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, filtering capabilities, and output format. Every element earns its place with zero wasted words, making it easy to parse.

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 search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose and output format. However, without annotations and with no output schema, it lacks details on authentication, rate limits, error handling, or the structure of returned conversation data beyond IDs and duration.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning time window filtering and optional phone number filtering, but doesn't provide additional semantic context. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool searches for voice conversations with specific filtering capabilities (phone number, time window) and returns paginated conversation IDs and call duration. It distinguishes itself from siblings like conversation_sentiment or conversation_transcript by focusing on search and retrieval rather than analysis or content extraction.

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 implies usage for searching conversations within time windows with optional phone filtering, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sample_conversations_by_queue or voice_call_quality. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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