Get SIP endpoint

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

Confirms 'Read-only', consistent with readOnlyHint=true, and adds context beyond the annotations: registration details appear only when a device is registered, and passwords are never returned here (reset via the Vobiz console). Useful negative and conditional disclosure; error/permission behavior is still unstated.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the use case, then the two caveats. Nothing redundant, though it is close to the maximum useful length for a single-read tool.

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 carries return-value burden and does so by listing the fields, plus the online-status and password caveats. Only the endpoint_id semantics/value source is left uncovered.

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% and the description never explains the sole required parameter endpoint_id — no mention of its format (the schema enforces ^\d{4,25}$) or where to obtain it. The description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Return one Vobiz SIP endpoint') and enumerates the returned fields: username, alias, SIP URI, attached application, registration details. This distinguishes it cleanly from the sibling list_sip_endpoints, which returns many.

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 concrete use case: 'Use it to check whether a soft-phone or WebRTC client is online.' No explicit when-not or named alternative, but the task context is clear and actionable.

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