List active FreeSWITCH channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and openness are covered. The description adds that output mirrors 'show channels' and is a live snapshot rather than historical, but says nothing about output shape, volume, or refresh cadence.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the identifying characteristic (live call legs) comes first. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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?

A one-parameter, read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and annotations needs little more than this. Only the absence of any note on result size or relationship to the other FreeSWITCH status tools keeps it from a 5.

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% and the single optional 'filter' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including substring-matching semantics. The description adds nothing about parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

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 specific resource and scope: 'every call leg currently up on the switch', qualified as FreeSWITCH and tied to the 'show channels' source. This implicitly separates it from the Asterisk siblings (asterisk_channels), though it never names them directly.

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?

Gives a clear selection rule: 'the tool for what calls are live right now'. It stops short of exclusions — it doesn't say when to prefer freeswitch_status, freeswitch_sofia_status, or freeswitch_registrations instead.

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