Transfer a live call

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent) by disclosing the actual side effect ('stops the current flow on the chosen leg and fetches new call XML'), the confirm gate, the HTTP-mode-only constraint for server-hosted Dial flows, and the approved-host requirement for custom XML URLs.

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?

Front-loaded with the operation and scope, then proceeds through mechanism, parameter choices, and the warm-transfer note in four dense sentences. Every sentence carries information, though the parenthetical clauses make it slightly heavy to parse at a glance.

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?

Covers the mechanics, prerequisites (confirm, approved host, HTTP mode), and the alternative transfer style for a destructive, open-world mutation tool with no output schema. Minor gaps remain around post-transfer call state and failure/error behavior.

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?

Adds real meaning over the 67%-covered schema: `destination` accepts E.164 or sip: URI and triggers a server-hosted <Dial> flow, while `aleg_url`/`bleg_url` must be on an approved host. Still leaves `aleg_method`, `bleg_method`, `caller_id`, and `legs` behavior largely to the schema.

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 (blind-transfer a LIVE call) and pins the mechanism (POST /Call/{uuid}/), immediately separating it from the warm/attended-transfer path. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like make_call, end_call, or hold_call without opening a schema.

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 explicit conditional guidance: use `destination` OR `aleg_url`/`bleg_url`, and requires `confirm: true`. It also explains how to handle the attended/warm case, though it doesn't name sibling tools or state when this tool should not be chosen over them.

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