retell_get_call

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns transcript, recording URL, latency, and cost, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention any potential side effects (unlikely for a get), permissions, or error behavior, so transparency is adequate but not rich.

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, focused sentence that leads with the core action and then lists valuable specifics. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 get-by-id tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It states the tool's purpose and enumerates the main return fields, which is sufficient for an agent to know what to expect. It does not explain error cases or authentication, but these are less critical for a read-only get operation.

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 already provides 100% coverage for call_id, and the tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. The description's mention of 'specific call' reinforces the parameter's purpose, but no extra detail is added. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema 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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('a specific call'), and enumerates key details ('transcript, recording URL, latency, and cost'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like retell_list_calls, which lists calls, and retell_delete_call, which deletes one.

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 implies usage: you need a specific call_id and want full details. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'use retell_list_calls to find call IDs') or any exclusion criteria. The guidance is implicit and minimal.

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