rtpengine_terminate_call

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the destructive action but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or error behavior. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Concise yet informative: a one-sentence summary, usage context, and parameter explanation in a structured format. No wasted words.

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 output schema exists, description is mostly complete. Explains parameter and usage context well. Could mention return values or failure behavior, but overall sufficient for a single-param tool.

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 coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning: 'Exact SIP Call-ID of the media session to terminate', specifying the parameter's purpose and required precision.

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?

Description clearly states 'Tear down the RTPEngine media session' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like rtpengine_sessions and rtpengine_show.

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?

Explicitly says when to use ('when a signalling bug leaves a media session stranded') and when not to ('SIP-level dlg_end_dlg alone won't free the RTP ports'), providing clear guidance.

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