conduyt_list_dnc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the auth scope requirement and that only 'active' entries are returned, but it says nothing about return shape, pagination behavior, or ordering for a list tool.

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 tight sentences with the resource and scope constraint front-loaded and zero filler. Every clause carries information.

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 filtered read-list tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema; the description covers purpose, filters, and the auth prerequisite. Only the lack of any indication of return volume/pagination behavior keeps it from complete.

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%, so all four parameters are documented in the schema itself, establishing a baseline of 3. The description restates the search (phone or contact name) and tier semantics but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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 verb and resource ('List active Do-Not-Call / litigator entries') and distinguishes itself implicitly from the mutation siblings conduyt_add_dnc / conduyt_remove_dnc. An agent can identify the operation and the entity class immediately.

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?

Provides clear usage context: filtering by search or tier, and the hard prerequisite of the explicit 'dnc' API-key scope. It does not explicitly name add_dnc/remove_dnc as the alternatives for mutation, so there are no exclusions, but the operational context is sufficient.

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