Get Message Status (Telnyx)

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) indicate a safe, read-only operation. The description adds value by detailing the return fields (per-recipient status, parts, timestamps, errors, cost), providing context beyond the annotations.

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 sentence followed by a list of return fields. It is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, though the list could be slightly more structured. It effectively conveys necessary information without waste.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description still covers the tool's functionality, input requirements, and return fields comprehensively. It leaves no gaps for a simple status retrieval tool.

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 100% with a clear parameter description. The description mentions 'by message UUID' which matches the schema, and adds that the UUID is 'returned by send_sms', offering slight additional context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves delivery status and events for a previously sent Telnyx message by UUID. It lists specific return fields, distinct from sibling tools like phone.telnyx.sms_na which send messages.

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 after sending a message by referencing 'previously sent Telnyx message' and the message UUID. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools.

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