joltsms_get_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the response content (the fields it returns), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior for a non-existent number, rate limits, or whether the lookup is scoped to the account.

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, front-loaded with the action and result set, then the accepted input formats. The field enumeration is slightly long but each item tells the agent what it will receive, so little is wasted.

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 output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields, which is exactly what an agent needs to decide whether to call it. The remaining gap is behavioral (auth/error handling) rather than structural.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema's single example by listing accepted input shapes: UUID, E.164 ('+16505551234'), dashed ('650-555-1234'), and parenthesized ('(650) 555-1234'). This tells the agent the lookup tolerates human-formatted numbers.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a single phone number') and enumerates the exact payload (service label, tags, notes, message counts, billing dates, subscription status). This clearly separates it from the list/update/provision siblings without needing to name them.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word 'single' hints that this is the per-number lookup counterpart to joltsms_list_numbers, but no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative is given. No prerequisites or conditions are stated.

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