Revoke a single SIP registration

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds valuable context: 'Step-up MFA required' and a list of specific error codes. No contradictions with 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?

Extremely concise and front-loaded. Each sentence adds necessary information: purpose, prerequisite, security requirement, and error list. No unnecessary 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 the destructive nature, 3 required params, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, data source for IDs, MFA requirement, and error handling. It is fully adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds extra guidance: 'find it with trunk_list_credentials' for cred_id, 'find it with trunk_list' for trunk_id, and 'from trunk_list_credential_registrations' for contact_id, enhancing the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Evict' and clearly identifies the resource as 'SIP contact binding from Kamailio usrloc for a credential's AOR'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like trunk_list_credential_registrations (list) and trunk_rotate_credential (rotate) by focusing on revocation.

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 states prerequisite: 'Use trunk_list_credential_registrations first to find the contact_id'. Lists possible errors. However, it does not compare with alternatives like trunk_rotate_credential or explicitly state when not to use.

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