Suspend / Restore Line

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

Goes beyond the destructive/openWorld/idempotent annotations by explaining the real-world consequence: the holder is cut off from calls, SMS and data completely until restored. The writes-flag requirement and confirmation rule are useful extra context an agent cannot infer from 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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then prerequisite and consequence, then the confirmation requirement. Every sentence carries operational weight and nothing is repeated.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the key things an agent needs: what it does, the server gate, the scope of impact, and the user-confirmation step. Only minor gaps remain, such as what a restore actually re-enables.

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 only 67%, and the description adds no meaning for any parameter: it never explains numberId, the suspend/restore enum, or the reason field's audit-log purpose (that lives only in the schema). The description relies entirely on the schema for parameter semantics, leaving the coverage gap unfilled.

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 pair of verbs (suspend/restore) on a specific resource (a line), with a concrete example of when suspension applies (a lost phone). No sibling tool does this, so the agent can route to it immediately.

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?

Gives clear context (lost phone) and a hard prerequisite (TELGEA_ENABLE_WRITES=true) plus an operational rule (confirm with the user first). It does not name alternatives or carve out when-not-to-use cases, which keeps it below a 5.

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