List active Asterisk channels

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds context about the returned fields (caller ID, state, bridge, duration, dialplan location) which exceeds the annotations. However, it does not disclose behavior like potential latency, pagination, or the effect of the filter, so it remains moderate.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the enumeration of returned fields and ending with a crisp use case. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple read-only listing tool with one optional filter, the description covers the key aspects: what data is returned, when to use it, and its live nature. It does not provide output structure details, but no output schema is present and the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose.

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 schema description covers the sole parameter (filter) with a clear case-insensitive substring explanation and an example. The tool description adds no additional parameter guidance, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool lists active Asterisk channels with specific fields (caller ID, state, bridge, duration, dialplan location). It includes a memorable usage phrase, 'what calls are live right now', which distinctly positions it against sibling tools like asterisk_endpoints or asterisk_status.

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 indicates when to use this tool: to see live calls ('This is the tool for 'what calls are live right now''). It implies a scenario for selecting this over others but does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, such as when not to use it.

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