get_call_queue_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Get agents' implying a read operation, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or what is included in the response (e.g., agent names, IDs, status). This is insufficient for full transparency.

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 6 words, very concise and front-loaded. However, it could include a bit more context (e.g., 'for a given queue') without harming conciseness. It is efficient but not excessively terse.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is minimal but covers the core purpose. It does not describe the return format or any constraints, but for a basic retrieval tool this may be minimally adequate. Lacks completeness for an ideal agent experience.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('Domain name', 'Call queue ID'), so the schema already provides clear semantics. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, meeting the baseline.

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 'Get agents assigned to a call queue' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (agents), and scope (assigned to a call queue). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_agents (all agents) and get_agent_statistics (statistics). The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist (e.g., get_agents, get_call_queue) but no context is given for differentiation. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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