Get trunk live throttle state

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

Annotations already indicate safe, read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable details: on Redis read failure, counters are null with a 200 status, and it lists specific error codes (INVALID_ID, NO_ACTIVE_CUSTOMER, NOT_FOUND). This goes beyond annotations.

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 concise (three sentences) with no redundant information. Each sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, and failure behavior. The information is front-loaded with the main action.

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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers essential context: purpose, usage scenario, failure mode, and errors. It could optionally detail the response structure (e.g., fields returned), but the given level is sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

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 schema covers the single parameter trunk_id with a description ('Trunk group UUID (find it with trunk_list)'). The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline of 3 for 100% schema coverage.

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 retrieves 'configured capacity plus live CPS/channel counters' for an owned trunk, distinguishing it from other trunk tools like trunk_get (basic info) or trunk_list (listing). The specific verb+resource combination is 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 explicitly says to use this tool 'to check current load before draining, deleting, or resizing a trunk,' providing a clear use case and implicitly guiding when not to use it (e.g., for non-load-related checks).

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