ghl_search_available_phone_numbers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly conveys that this is a read-only search operation with no destructive side effects, but it does not describe the return format, pagination, or any constraints. The phrase 'to purchase' helpfully clarifies that it does not actually purchase numbers.

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 sentence of 13 words, front-loaded with the primary action and resource. Every phrase earns its place—action, object, filters—with zero redundancy or filler.

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 having 8 parameters and no output schema, the description gives a clear summary of intended use and main filter categories. However, it does not describe the structure of the return data or any pagination details, which leaves an agent uncertain about the response shape. The absence of an output schema places more responsibility on the description, which it only partially meets.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level grouping of filters ('country, number type, or capabilities') but does not elaborate on number matching parameters like firstPart or lastPart. Thus, it provides minimal additional meaning beyond the 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('available phone numbers') with an explicit purpose ('to purchase'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_get_phone_numbers (which lists existing numbers) and ghl_purchase_phone_number (which executes the purchase) by clearly indicating this is a discovery step for available inventory.

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 context—searching for numbers before purchasing—but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or how it relates to alternatives. No exclusions are given, though the word 'available' and the purchase context provide some guidance.

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