Get SIP trunk

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior the annotations do not: SIP credentials are redacted, and it lists which configuration facets are returned. It does not discuss auth requirements or error behavior, but for a single read that is a minor gap.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the returned surface, then the redaction caveat. No filler and nothing buried.

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 naming the returned fields, which is what an agent needs for a single-resource GET. Missing only error/not-found behavior and any note that the trunk must belong to the caller's account.

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 says nothing about trunk_id beyond its name. The name is self-explanatory and the schema's UUID pattern carries the format constraint, so this is adequate but adds no meaning beyond structured data.

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 SIP trunk's configuration') and enumerates the fields returned (domain, status, direction, limits, transport, recording). The singular 'one' implicitly separates it from list_sip_trunks, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus list_sip_trunks, get_sip_endpoint, or list_trunk_credentials, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The only contextual cue is the trailing 'Read-only', which is a safety claim rather than usage guidance.

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