ghl_phone_list_available_numbers

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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly and idempotent. The description adds that it searches 'Twilio inventory' and lists OAuth scopes, but does not elaborate on rate limits, pagination, or response behavior. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 core purpose is stated concisely, but the description includes extraneous details about a renaming and version header that are not helpful for tool selection or invocation. This reduces conciseness and clarity.

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 9 required parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context about how parameters interact or what the response contains. It only says 'for the given location', leaving the agent without guidance on combining filters like firstPart and lastPart.

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 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description adds no additional meaning or usage context beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states 'List available phone numbers' and 'Search Twilio inventory for purchasable phone numbers', clearly identifying the tool's purpose of finding purchasable numbers. It distinguishes from siblings like ghl_phone_list_active_numbers by specifying 'purchasable' and 'available'. However, the first line about renaming and a typo is distracting noise.

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 this tool is for purchasing phone numbers by mentioning 'purchasable phone numbers', but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like ghl_phone_list_active_numbers or ghl_phone_list_number_pools. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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