get_active_calls

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses the real-time nature, enumerates the returned fields (agents, call duration, caller numbers, connection status), and importantly notes that an empty list is normal. This goes beyond basic expectations and sets clear behavior.

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 succinct and well-structured, leading with the core purpose, then data fields, usage scenarios, and an edge-case note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given its simplicity (no params) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, return content, and an edge case, leaving no significant gaps for the agent to resolve on its own.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific detail because none is needed.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Get all voice sessions happening right now across your organization.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_calls by emphasizing real-time active sessions and the specific data returned.

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?

It gives explicit use cases: 'Use this for live monitoring, to find a call_id for hangup_call, or to check system load before starting a campaign.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for historical calls).

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