Search Aircall calls

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true`, `idempotentHint: true`, and `destructiveHint: false`, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context with 'Aircall applies multiple tags as an AND condition,' which is not present in the schema or annotations. No contradiction exists.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant phrasing. The first sentence front-loads purpose and scope, while the second adds a specific behavioral nuance. Every word contributes meaning.

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 12 optional parameters and no output schema, the description captures the essential search dimensions and tag behavior, which is sufficient for selecting the tool. Pagination and default behaviors are not described, but they are largely covered by the schema (`page`, `per_page`, `order`, etc.), so the description remains adequate for initial invocation.

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 description maps several schema parameters that lack explanations (`user_id`, `phone_number`, `direction`, `tags`) to simple search criteria. It also introduces the important semantic that multiple tags are combined with AND, which is absent from the schema. Since schema coverage is 67%, the description compensates for the undocumented parameters.

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 states 'Search calls by date, direction, user, phone number, and tag IDs,' clearly naming the resource and specific search dimensions. It implies differentiation from sibling tools like `aircall_list_calls` and `aircall_get_call`, though it does not explicitly highlight these alternatives.

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 use when calls need to be filtered by the listed criteria, but it does not explicitly contrast with `aircall_list_calls` or state when not to use this tool. The note that 'Aircall applies multiple tags as an AND condition' provides usage guidance for the tags parameter, but overall selection guidance remains implicit.

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