bolna_remove_sip_trunk_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the important side effect of removing agent mapping, but lacks details such as reversibility, permission requirements, or success/failure behavior.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core action and a key behavioral note (removing agent mapping). It is front-loaded and contains no superfluous 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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations. The description does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation, error types, or updated trunk object). Given the destructive nature and lack of complementary structured information, the description is incomplete for an agent to confidently use.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters (trunk_id and phone_number_id). The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'a phone number from a SIP trunk', and also notes the side effect 'also removes any agent mapping'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bolna_add_sip_trunk_number and bolna_list_sip_trunk_numbers.

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 implies when to use the tool (to remove a phone number from a SIP trunk) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., deleting the phone number entirely or unlinking an agent separately). No contextual cues for decision-making.

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