uac_reg_list

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

With no annotations, the description states it shows current carrier/trunk registrations, implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, permissions needs, or rate limits. The output columns are listed, adding some 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and optional filters, followed by clarification of the data shown and output columns. No redundant information.

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 simple list tool with two parameters and an available output schema, the description covers the purpose, filters, and output fields. It does not explicitly state default behavior (list all when no filters), but that is reasonable. Minimal gaps.

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 description adds meaning to the schema by clarifying that the two optional parameters are filters for AOR and contact, which the schema alone (with only names and types) does not provide. However, it does not explain the format or semantics of AOR, leaving some ambiguity.

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 lists UAC registrations with optional filters by AOR or contact. It specifies the resource (UAC registrations) and verb (list), and distinguishes from sibling tools like uac_reg_enable or uac_reg_force_register by being a read-only list operation.

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 mentions optional filters but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no context about prerequisites or complementary tools.

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