place_outbound_call

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

With no annotations, this description carries the full disclosure burden, but it only surfaces the API-key requirement. It does not state that this places a real outbound call, may incur cost, runs asynchronously, or triggers webhooks, so an agent cannot anticipate the side effects.

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 text is short and front-loads the action, with the API-key requirement in a separate concise sentence. It loses a point because the first sentence partially restates the tool name and carries no usage or behavior detail.

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 an 8-parameter action tool with no output schema and no annotations, this one-line description is not complete. It omits the call lifecycle, asynchronous behavior, result/transcript retrieval, and any caveats, though the schema covers parameter meaning.

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%, including E.164 format for target and instruction-set semantics for tasks, so the schema already documents the parameters adequately. The description adds no parameter-level information, leaving the score at baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Place') with a clear resource ('outbound ClawdCall agent call'), and the action is obviously distinct from the sibling tools, which handle OTP verification and transcript retrieval. It tells an agent exactly what operation this tool performs.

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 its siblings or when not to use it. The only usage-related note is the CLAWDCALL_API_KEY requirement, which is a prerequisite rather than a selection criterion.

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