List Expiry Notices

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, so the description's job is to add scope context beyond that. It adds nothing — no indication of what kind of expiries (dial users? packages?) or pagination/ordering behavior. No contradiction with annotations, but no value added either.

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?

It is a single front-loaded phrase with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than concise — brevity here reflects missing information rather than efficiency.

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 no parameters and an output schema present, the description carries little structural burden, yet it fails to disambiguate this tool from near-identical notice siblings. For a zero-arg list tool in a large family, that disambiguation is the only thing the description needed to supply.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per calibration the baseline is 4. The description cannot and need not document parameters, and the empty schema is fully consistent with the description.

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 clear verb+resource (list expiry notices), which is specific enough on its own. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the many sibling notice tools (list_realtime_notices, list_periodic_notices, list_dial_user_expiry_notices), so an agent cannot tell which 'expiry' scope this covers without guessing.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_dial_user_expiry_notices or list_realtime_notices, which is a real gap given the crowded notice-tool family. The agent is left to infer the context entirely.

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