yeastar_list_outbound_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only, non-mutating operation and the parenthetical clarifies the return concept, but the description does not mention pagination behavior, permission requirements, or whether full route details are returned. It is adequate for a simple list tool but not explicit.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with a concise parenthetical adding essential domain context. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

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 straightforward list tool with two optional self-documenting pagination parameters and no output schema, the description provides the core return concept ('which trunk handles calls matching which dial pattern'). Minor gaps include the lack of an explicit read-only statement and no detail on the output structure, but these are largely inferable from the verb and context.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters (page and page_size), so the schema already documents their meaning and defaults. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but none is needed since the schema is sufficient.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('outbound call routes'), and the parenthetical 'which trunk handles calls matching which dial pattern' gives the domain meaning that differentiates it from sibling list_inbound_routes. An agent can immediately tell what the tool does and how it relates to get_outbound_route.

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 verb 'List' implies this is for enumerating all outbound routes, which suggests contrast with get_outbound_route for a single route, and with list_inbound_routes for the inbound counterpart. However, the description never explicitly names alternatives or states when to choose this tool, leaving usage to inference.

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