Fetch call recordings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' merely repeats structured data. The description says nothing about pagination behavior, filter semantics, or that per_page is not honored by every endpoint — the kind of context that would actually help an agent.

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 short segments, front-loaded with the purpose, no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than crisp conciseness.

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?

With eight parameters, no output schema, and filter parameters whose semantics (filter_from/to/date/direction) are opaque, the description does far too little. An agent gets no hint about pagination, date filtering behavior, or what a recording record contains before calling.

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%, so all eight parameters are documented in the schema (page, order, per_page, filter_* fields, response_format). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch call recordings') and gives the underlying endpoint GET /recordings, so an agent knows this is a list-style read. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like get_recording or list_call_detail_records.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus get_recording for a single item or list_call_detail_records. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and plural resource.

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