telefonica_analytics_call_stats_by_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it returns statistics but doesn't specify what kind of statistics (e.g., call duration, frequency), whether it's a read-only operation, if there are rate limits, or authentication requirements. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (which should cover return values), the description's main gaps are in parameter semantics and behavioral context. However, with no annotations and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete for a tool with 3 required parameters, as it doesn't fully explain inputs or operational traits.

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 0%, meaning parameters 'src_id', 'identificador', and 'numero_telefone' are undocumented in the schema. The description only implies 'numero_telefone' is a phone number and 'arquivo especifico' relates to a file, but doesn't explain what 'src_id' or 'identificador' represent or how they interact with the file, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 action ('Retorna estatisticas de ligacoes') and the target ('para um numero em arquivo especifico'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'telefonica_analytics_calls_by_file' or 'telefonica_analytics_call_stats_by_case', which appear to offer similar functionality with different scopes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'arquivo especifico' but doesn't clarify prerequisites, such as whether the file must be pre-loaded or available in a system, nor does it compare to siblings like 'telefonica_analytics_call_stats_by_case' for case-based stats.

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