reuse_number

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the cost ($0.50) and the two modes (free/paid) with their conditions, but does not reveal potential side effects such as whether the verification is consumed, if the number changes, or any failure modes when conditions are not met.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the primary action and then explains the free/paid conditions efficiently.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential functionality and pricing. It lacks details about return values or error handling, but the low complexity and good schema coverage for rental_id make the description sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 50% with rental_id documented as 'ver_xxx from a verification' but paid lacking description. The description adds semantics by explaining that paid reuse costs $0.50 and is gated on allow_paid_reuse, and free reuse on allow_reuse, giving the 'paid' parameter meaningful context beyond its type/default.

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 ('Reuse') and resource ('completed/expired verification') with a clear outcome ('receive another SMS'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like rent_number and re_rent_rental by focusing on verification reuse rather than renting or re-renting a number.

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 clearly states when free reuse is available (allow_reuse true) and when paid reuse is available (allow_paid_reuse true), including the price. It provides clear context for usage but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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