b24_telephony_calls

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the operation and filter options. It does not disclose that this is a read-only query in explicit terms, nor does it mention pagination behavior, response format, rate limits, or authentication needs.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the resource, action, and key filter dimensions without redundant words. Every element earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, five parameters, and a nested filter object, this description is too sparse. It omits pagination semantics, select-field usage, webhook_url role, and expected return shape; the agent would need the parameter descriptions to call it reliably.

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 60%, so partial compensation is needed. The description adds meaning by naming user and date filters beyond the schema examples, but it does not explain the exact filter keys for those fields, nor does it cover select or webhook_url semantics. The filter/enum examples in the schema carry much of the weight.

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 names a specific verb and resource — 'Lista el historial de llamadas' (lists the call history) — and enumerates the filter dimensions (CRM entity, user, duration, date). This clearly separates it from b24_call, which places calls, and from CRM/task listing tools.

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 is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as b24_call, nor are any exclusions or prerequisites provided. The usage context is only implied by 'list call history' rather than explicitly stated.

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